Texas Supreme Court· 5/27/2011

In Re Reece

Citations

341 S.W.3d 360
54 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1031
2011 Tex. LEXIS 393
2011 WL 2112786

How courts have described this case

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

observing that mandamus is extraordinary remedy issued not as matter of right but at court’s discretion
stating that objective of criminal contempt order is to punish for a “completed act [that] affronted the dignity and authority of the court”
emphasizing that distinction does not turn on nature of underlying litigation as civil or criminal
explaining that mandamus may be available to prevent the loss of substantive or procedural rights
observing that mandamus is extraordinary remedy issued not as matter of right but at court’s discretion
explaining that “[s]ection 21.002 of the Government Code sets forth the only statutory framework for contempt” and that “[a]ny restrictions on this authority are found in the common law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Guzman, Jefferson, Hecht, Wainwright, Medina, Green, Lehrmann, Johnson, Willett

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

300 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

68 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named In Re Reece

6 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.