Case Citator › Schafer v. Conner

Schafer v. Conner

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of Texas
Citation
813 S.W.2d 154
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
34 of 34
Citing cases (total)
34
Treatment dates
1999
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. All 34 flagged citations have been read. A later Texas appellate rule changed Schafer v. Conner's presumption about missing evidence when an appellant properly designates a partial reporter's record.
More on how this was screened

Courts continue to apply the presumption when that condition is not met. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

34 later cases cite Schafer v. Conner; 34 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Schafer v. Conner?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • The court explained that revised Rule 34.6(c)(4) changed Schafer's complete-record presumption for properly designated partial records.

    Roberts v. Roberts · Texas Eighth Court of Appeals · filed

    The presumption has changed, however. In Englander Co., Inc. v. Kennedy, 428 S.W.2d 806, 806 (Tex.1968)(per curiam), the Supreme Court ruled that a complaint about the legal or factual sufficiency of the evidence cannot be successfully raised without a complete statement of facts. See Schafer v. Conner, 813 S.W.2d 154, 155 (Tex.1991)(in the absence of a complete statement of facts, it is presumed that the omitted evidence supports the judgment). New Rule 34.6(c)(4) provides that when a partial reporter's record is properly designated, "The appellate court must presume that the partial reporter's record designated by the parties constitutes the entire record for purposes of reviewing the stated points or issues. This presumption applies even if the statement includes a point or issue complaining of the legal or factual sufficiency of the evidence to support a specific factual finding identified in that point or issue.” The new language overrules Englander in those situations where a partial reporter’s record is properly requested.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Schafer v. Conner and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace