Texas Legislature Online - 88 (R) Text for HB 969
Version: Bill: Fiscal Note: Analysis: Witness List: Summary of Cmte Action: Introduced: House Committee Report: Engrossed: Senate Committee Report: Enrolled
Texas Legislature Online - 88 (R) Actions for HB 969
HB 969 Legislative Session: 88(R) Author: Cook: Add to Bill List: Actions: (descending date order) Viewing Votes: Most Recent House Vote | Most Recent Senate Vote: Description: Comment: Date: Time : Journal Page: E : Effective on 9/1/23 : 06/13/2023 : E Signed by the Governor : 06/13/2023 : 6491: E
TX HB969 | 2023-2024 | 88th Legislature | LegiScan
2023 TX HB969 (Summary) Relating to local regulation to enforce child custody orders; authorizing a civil penalty.
88 (R) HB 969 - Senate Committee Report version - Bill Text
CIVIL PENALTY FOR INTERFERENCE WITH CHILD. CUSTODY ORDER. A municipality or county in this state may adopt an. Code. SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2023.
Bill Text: TX HB969 | 2023-2024 | 88th Legislature | Introduced
2023 TX HB969 (Text) Relating to local regulation to enforce child custody orders; authorizing a civil penalty.
Bill Text: TX HB969 | 2023-2024 | 88th Legislature | Enrolled
2023 TX HB969 (Text) Relating to local regulation to enforce child custody orders; authorizing a civil penalty.
Sharp v. Park ‘N Fly of Texas, Inc., 969 S.W.2d 572 - Casetext
May 14, 1998 · Park `N Fly of Texas, Inc. ("PNF"), appellee, filed suit against John Sharp, Comptroller of Public Accounts for the State of Texas, and Dan Morales, Attorney General of the State of Texas, appellants (collectively the "Comptroller"), to recover taxes paid under protest. See Tex. Tax Code Ann. ("Tax Code") § 112.052 (West 1992).
88 (R) HB 969 - Enrolled version - Bill Text
I certify that H.B. No. 969 was passed by the House on May 9, 2023, by the following vote: Yeas 139, Nays 3, 2 present, not voting. _____ Chief Clerk of the House I certify that H.B. No. 969 was passed by the Senate on May ...
law-spoliation-presumption
969 S.W.2d 950, 953 (Tex. 1998); Malone v. Foster, 977 S.W.2d 562, 563 (Tex. 1998), and, accordingly, do not constitute claims subject to attack by way of a no-evidence motion for summary judgment. Rather, spoliation is an evidentiary concept that is best remedied by the trial court within the context of the core lawsuit
Anurithi Madugula v. FM 969 Commercial Development, LLC
See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 11.054 (stating criteria for finding plaintiff vexatious litigant). We also advised appellant that failure to obtain permission would result in dismissal of this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
- Some results have been removed