Texas Supreme Court· 12/5/1951

In Re King's Estate

Citations

244 S.W.2d 660
150 Tex. 662
1951 Tex. LEXIS 472

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

deciding that direct-appeal court applied a no-evidence, instead of a factual-sufficiency, standard from “conspicuous absence of any reference to the evidence” for the losing party
deciding that direct-appeal court applied a no-evidence, instead of a factual-sufficiency, standard from \conspicuous absence of any reference to the evidence\ for the losing party
stating interpretation of a written contract is a matter of law if the contract is clear and unambiguous
stating interpretation of a written contract is a matter of law if the contract is clear and unambiguous
under abuse of discretion standard, legal and factual insufficiency are relevant factors in assessing whether trial court abused its discretion
\so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3,254 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named In Re King's Estate

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.