Designated for publication Smith, J. (joined by Elrod, Jones, Haynes, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham, Wilson) (oral argument); Ho, J., concurring; Oldham, J., concurring (joined by Elrod, Jones, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt); Richman, J., dissenting (joined by Stewart, Southwick, Higginson, Ramirez, and joined by Graves and Douglas as to part II on standing); Graves, J., … More April 24, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication Ho, J. (Clement, Graves, Ho) (oral argument), Fourth Amendment, qualified immunity Reversing denial of summary judgment to defendants in excessive force claims. Amanda Carter’s minor daughter attended Live Oak High School. In February 2022, a Louisiana Department of Children and Family Services agent visited the Carters’ home to investigate a report of … More April 20, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication Duncan, J. (Haynes, Duncan, Ramirez) (oral argument), contract, bankruptcy, indemnification Affirming denial of plaintiff creditor’s objection to debtor’s reorganization plan. Midea, the manufacturer of Instapot cooking appliances, and Corelle operated under a 2016 master supply agreement (MSA) whereby Corelle placed individual purchase orders (POs) specifying price, quantity, packaging, and delivery terms. The MSA … More March 18, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication Higginson, J. (King, Higginson, Wilson) (oral argument withdrawn), Title IX, costs Affirming costs award to defendant on plaintiffs’ Title IX claims. Eight former student-athletes on SMU’s women’s rowing team sued the university for gender-based discrimination under Title IX and negligence under Texas law, alleging that substandard coaching, athletic training, and medical treatment … More March 16, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication per curiam (Elrod, Jones, Smith, Stewart, Richman, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham, Wilson, Douglas, Ramirez) (oral argument), Haynes, J., concurring (joined by Southwick and Douglas); administrative law, en banc In the first of the en banc opinions released from the January 2026 en banc sitting, exactly as we … More February 3, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication Douglas, J. (Smith, Higginson, Douglas) (oral argument), sec. 1988, standing, attorneys’ fees Affirming vacatur of attorneys’ fee award after vacatur of declaratory judgment relief for lack of standing in plaintiff’s constitutional challenge to city’s home rule charter. Plaintiffs-Appellants challenged provisions of the City of Houston home-rule charter requiring initiative petition circulators to … More January 2-6, 2026, opinions
Designated for publication per curiam (en banc) (voting against rehearing: Elrod, Stewart, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, Willett, Ho, Douglas, Ramirez, JJ.; voting for rehearing: Jones, Smith, Richman, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham, Wilson, JJ.); Ho, J., concurring in denial of rehearing; Oldham, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing (joined by Jones, Smith, Richman, Duncan, Engelhardt, Wilson, JJ.) … More December 18-20, 2025, opinions
Designated for publication per curiam (Higginbotham, Ho, Douglas) (oral argument withdrawn), criminal, sentencing Affirming sentence on conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon. The Court affirmed the sentence of Eddie Hudson. The court found no error in the district court’s decision to treat Hudson’s 2008 Arkansas robbery conviction as a prior “crime of … More December 5, 2025, opinions
Designated for publication Elrod, C.J. (Elrod, Clement, Haynes) (oral argument), Haynes, dissenting in part; timeliness, personal torts Affirming dismissal as untimely of claims brought under Texas law, originally in Texas state courts but then removed, for monetary damages arising from chemical explosions at defendant’s facility, where original action was certified as to injunctive relief class … More October 30-31, 2025, opinions
Designated for publication Elrod, C.J. (Elrod, Clement, Haynes) (no oral argument), Rooker-Feldman doctrine, personal tort, defamation Vacating Rooker-Feldman-based dismissal of plaintiff attorney’s defamation claims against defendant attorneys who had represented the plaintiff’s client’s employer in underlying Title IX claims brought by plaintiff’s client arising from alleged sexual assault and harassment of university students by university’s … More October 8, 2025, opinions
