Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 914 S.W.2d 140 - Chenault v. Phillips

Chenault v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
2
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably In Re Allcat Claims Service, L.P. and John Weakly (2011), Texas Logos, L.P. v. Texas Department of Transportation (2007)

32 state decisions

190199620002010decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Walker v. Packer · Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Board · Industrial National Bank of Rhode Island v. Wingate Corp. · Holloway v. Fifth Court of Appeals · State v. Morales

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

  1. “Because the Court's power to regulate the practice of law is an administrative one, the exercise of that power does not in and of itself deprive lower courts of general subject matter jurisdiction over challenges to that governance. They do not, however, have jurisdiction over all such challenges because in every individual case, jurisdiction also depends on justiciability.... [T]here must be a real controversy between the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial relief sought.... ... Had this Court actually promulgated rules establishing a pro bono program and had Gomez challenged the constitutionality of such rules, the district court would have jurisdiction to decide, in the first instance, whether such rules met constitutional standards. In due course, we would review any adverse determination in our adjudicative capacity.... Such a case would be justiciable because the district court would be capable of rendering a judgment that accords the parties complete relief, subject of course to appellate review.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[C]onstitutional challenges to rules enacted by this Court must be brought in the district court and heard by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.”
    1 later decision 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.