Case Citator › C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell

C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell

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

Good law
Court
Supreme Court of Texas
Citation
406 S.W.2d 191
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
54 of 54
Citing cases (total)
54
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell is good law: all 54 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated the case. The citing courts continued to apply its rules for reading negative jury findings, reconciling apparently conflicting findings, and disregarding immaterial findings.
More on how this was screened

Screening note: The staged Lanphier Construction Co. v. Fowco Construction Co. opinion contains no Campbell citation or discussion. The 2015 McNutt material is an appellants' brief, and Loera v. Fuentes rejected the parties' argument without rejecting Campbell. Howell v. State generated two flagged rows, both read in one opinion. The 2015 Bunker document is also an appellants' brief; the court's 2017 opinion in that case () does not cite Campbell.

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.

54 later cases cite C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell; 54 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 C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell?

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.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 54 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads C. & R. Transport, Inc. v. Campbell 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