Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 843 SW2D 464 - Hines v. Hash

Hines v. Hash’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Helena Chemical Co. v. Wilkins (2001), Spencer v. Eagle Star Insurance Co. of America (1994)

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 72 state decisions

350199320002010decided

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, 7th District (Amarillo))

Relationships

Relies on Plas-Tex, Inc. v. U.S. Steel Corp. · Weirich v. Weirich · Cail v. Service Motors, Inc. · Delaney v. University of Houston · Schepps v. Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas

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

  1. “[I]t is a defense to a- cause of action [under Section 17.50] if the ■ defendant proves that he received notice from the consumer .'.. and that' within 30 days after the day on which the defendant received the notice the defendant tendered to the consumer: (1) the amount of actual -damages claimed; and (2) the expenses, including attorneys’ fees, if any, reasonably incurred by the consumer in asserting the claim against the defendant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]f a plaintiff files an action for damages under the DTPA without first giving the required notice, and a defendant timely requests an abatement, the trial court must abate the proceedings for 60 days.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “abatement of the action for the statutory notice period is more consistent with the purpose of notice than dismissal.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.