Case Citator › Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling

Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling

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

Overruled in part
Court
Supreme Court of Texas
Citation
822 S.W.2d 1
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
37 of 37
Citing cases (total)
37
Treatment dates
2006
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling's exception to attorney-fee segregation was narrowed by the Texas Supreme Court in Tony Gullo Motors I, L.P. v. Chapa: shared facts alone no longer excuse separating fees for recoverable and unrecoverable claims. The confirmed partial overruling is listed below.
More on how this was screened

Stewart Title's one satisfaction rule remains in use. All 37 flagged citations have been read.

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.

37 later cases cite Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling; 37 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 Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling?

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

Overruled in part

  • The Texas Supreme Court changed Stewart Title's attorney-fee rule: common facts alone do not excuse separating fees for claims on which fees are unavailable.

    Tony Gullo Motors I, L.P. v. Chapa · Supreme Court of Texas · filed

    Intertwined facts do not make tort fees recoverable; it is only when discrete legal services advance both a recoverable and unrecovera*314ble claim that they are so intertwined that they need not be segregated. We modify Sterling to that extent.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling 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