Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 787 S.W.2d 369 - Driskill v. State

Driskill v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2019

2 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

30199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth))

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2680

Relies on United States v. Dion · State v. Terrell · Morris v. United States · Capozzoli v. Tracey · Interfirst Bank Dallas, N.A. v. United States

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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The exclusion contained in section 101.055 for claims arising “in connection with assessment or collection of taxes by a governmental unit,” closely tracks the federal exclusion for “[a]ny claim arising in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax....” 28 U.S.C. § 2680(c) (1982). Prior to the passage of the Texas Tort Claims Act, the federal counterpart had been construed to limit the United States’ governmental immunity to claims regarding injuries which result directly from the assessment or collection of taxes. See Broadway Open Air Theatre, Inc. v. United States, 208 F.2d 257, 259 (4th Cir.1953); United States v. Banner, 226 F.Supp. 904, 905 (N.D.N.Y.196S); Paige v. Dillon, 217 F.Supp. 18, 20 (S.D.N.Y.1963). We adopt a similar construction for section 101.055 of the Tort Claims Act. Our decision today is consistent with our interpretation of other exceptions to the waiver of immunity contained in the Tort Claims Act. In State v. Terrell, 588 S.W.2d 784 (Tex.1979), we considered the extent of protection from suit for police and fire departments afforded by section 101.055(3) of the Act for policy decisions as to when and how to provide protection. Interpreting that exception narrowly, we held that the State could be sued for injuries arising from the negligent non-emergency operation of a police vehicle because the legislature intended to exclude only those acts or omissions which constitute the execution of, or actual making of policy decisions concerning protect”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The exceptions to the waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the Texas Tort Claims Act are patterned after those contained in the Federal Tort Claims Act.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “be treated in the same manner as any private litigant.”
    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.