Case Citator › In Re King's Estate

In Re King's Estate

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

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of Texas
Citation
244 S.W.2d 660
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
572 of 572
Citing cases (total)
4,309
Treatment dates
1997
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. In re King's Estate is limited: every flagged citation has been read, and the one confirmed treatment is listed below. In re A.S. declined to extend the civil no-evidence standard to juvenile adjudications of penal offenses.
More on how this was screened

The other opinions applied or reaffirmed King's Estate's legal- and factual-sufficiency framework; their nearby uses of “overruled” disposed of points of error, contentions, motions, objections, or rehearing requests rather than the precedent.

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.

4,309 later cases cite In Re King's Estate; 572 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 In Re King's Estate?

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

Limited

  • The court held that King's Estate's civil no-evidence standard does not govern legal sufficiency of proof that a juvenile committed a penal offense; Jackson v. Virginia's beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard governs that context.

    In re A.S. · Court of Appeals of Texas, El Paso · filed

    If there is any evidence of probative force to support the jury’s finding, the point must be overruled and the finding upheld. In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660, 661-62 (1951)(per curiam) ... Lately, some appellate courts have rejected this approach and have instead applied the Jackson v. Virginia standard. ... Like the San Antonio and Waco Courts of Appeals, we are persuaded that the Jackson v. Virginia standard must be applied in a juvenile case when reviewing challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence to establish the elements of the penal offense that forms the basis of the finding that the juvenile engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads In Re King's Estate 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