Subaru of America, Inc. v. David McDavid Nissan, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[cjourts of general jurisdiction presumably have subject matter jurisdiction unless a contrary showing is made”
• concluding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to \try\ damages attributed to violations of motor vehicle commission code
• holding that the Board has \exclusive jurisdiction over claims and issues the [Texas Occupations] Code governs.\
• concluding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to “try” damages attributed to violations of motor vehicle commission code
• concluding that trial court’s decision about whether agency had primary or exclusive jurisdiction is legal question reviewed de novo by appellate courts
• holding that a party who did not challenge an agency’s findings was not required to pursue the available remedy of an appeal before suing in district court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).