Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 836 SW2D 705 - Resolution Trust Corp. v. Ammons

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Ammons’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
March 2013
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 23rd Judicial District Court)

Relationships

Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1441

Relies on D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance · City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Authority · Batson v. Kentucky · Montgomery v. Kennedy · MMP, Ltd. v. Jones

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

  1. “The RTC filed a response to Ammons’ motion for summary judgment and incorporated a memorandum of law in support of its response that was served on all parties and the trial court contemporaneously with its response. It is undisputed that the RTC’s motion in response and memorandum of law in support of the response were in ‘writing’ and ‘before’ the trial court at the summary judgment hearing. Moreover, the motion itself, by its language, expressly incorporated the memorandum of law. We find the RTC’s motion in response and supporting memorandum of law constitutes the type of ‘written motion, answer or other response’ contemplated by rule 166a(e). See S. McConnell v. Southside Indep. School Dist., 814 S.W.2d 247, 248 (Tex.App.-Austin 1991, writ granted) (Rule 166a allows a summary judgment mov-ant to set out the specific grounds for summary judgment in a brief served on all parties contemporaneously with the motion itself); see also Tex.R.Civ.P. 1 (rules are to be given liberal construction).”
    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.