Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 S.W.2d 885 - Fox v. Carr

Fox v. Carr’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
March 1985
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Bishop v. Wood · City of Amarillo v. Hancock · Texas Emp. Com'n v. INTERNATIONAL U. OF E., R. & M. WKRS. · Texas Employment Commission & General Electric Co. v. International Union of Electric Radio & Machine Workers, Local Union no. 782 · City of Wichita Falls v. Harris

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A subsequent amendment specifically provided for appeal where demotion occurs and amended Section 18 of the Statute now provides, ‘in the event any Fireman or Policeman is dissatisfied with the decision of the Commission, he may . file a petition in the District Court, asking that his order of suspension or dismissal or demotion be set aside. . . . ’ The statutory authority refers to ‘suspension or dismissal or demotion,’ and does not refer to the situation here presented, that is, a failure to promote. The statutory authority for appeal does not appear in such instance.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Considering the statute in its entirety, it appears to have been the intention of the legislature to allow an appeal to the district court only when a hearing before the civil service commission is required and when that body, after receiving and considering evidence, has rendered a final decision as a result of that hearing. As no hearing before the civil service commission is required in the case of disciplinary suspensions, the intent apparently was to allow no appeal from such a temporary order, but to leave the imposition of such a penalty in the discretion of the department head, subject only to reversal if the commission chose to investigate and disagreed with the action of the department head. Dictum of the court in City of Wichita Falls v. Harris, 532 S.W.2d 653 (Tex.Civ.App.—Fort Worth 1975, writ ref'd n.r.e.) supports this view.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The Commission shall hold a hearing and render a decision in writing within thirty (30) days after it receives said notice of appeal. Said decision shall state whether or not the suspended officer or employee shall be permanently or temporarily dismissed . . . or be restored to his former position . . . ”. (Emphasis supplied.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.