Marc H. Nathan v. Stephen Whittington

How courts have described this case

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

• characterizing Texas equivalent of seetion 38-8-110 as statute of repose and concluding that separate statute , suspending statutes of limitations did not apply to save or revive respondent's \extinguished\ claim
• interpreting section 24.020(a)(1) as a statute of repose because it creates a substantive right to be free from a lawsuit rather than procedurally barring the enforcement of a right
• “Considering the actual language of TUFTA section 24.010 and the Commissioners’ comments to UFTA section 9 on which it is modeled, we agree . . . that it is a statute of repose, rather than a statute of limitations.”
• “While statutes of limitations operate procedurally to bar the enforcement of a right, a statute of repose 22 takes away the right altogether, creating a substantive right to be free of liability after a specified time.” (citation and punctuation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).