Category: Texas verdict

texas verdict

New and noteworthy verdicts and settlements from around the country, selected by VerdictSearch editors. Find out about the case most relevant to your practice, with complete details on awards and settlements; injuries claimed; experts, attorneys, insurers and judges involved; and more.

Click on a state to view the latest featured verdicts by state:. Find out about the most important recent Texas cases, selected by VerdictSearch editors. Coverage includes Dallas, Harris and Tarrant counties. Jennifer Kwas was riding in the back of a city of La Porte ambulance while transporting a critical patient. The ambulance went through an intersection on a red light and a Lone Star Disposal truck driver veered to avoid it. The truck rolled over and part of its load fell on the ambulance.

Kwas sustained a lacerated spleen.

texas verdict

The plaintiff's accident reconstruction expert said the truck was going 40 mph when it entered the intersection and it was overloaded, both of which led to its rollover. The jury found negligence and comparative responsibility of 65 percent on Lone Star and 35 percent on its driver. It also found Lone Star grossly negligent. Kwas v. Lone Star Disposal, L. Harris County. Lee Contreras was hit by a driver for Buffalo Concrete of Texas, which stipulated to liability.

Contreras claimed neck and back strains and sprains; a disc protrusion at T; radicular pain and paresthesia in the buttocks and right shoulder; and a left knee contusion. He underwent cervical and lumbar medial branch blocks, and thoracic epidural steroid injections. The defense orthopedic surgery expert opined that commercials that use rhetorical devices injuries were only strains and sprains and a mild knee contusion.

Contreras v.The list is comprised of various case types that were tried either in state or federal courts of Texas. For firms that have made the list and would like to signify their achievement on their website or in other marketing materials, TopVerdict.

If you are the attorney who obtained one of the verdicts on this list, you can display a separate, personalized badge on your bio page to showcase your victory and potentially generate more business for your firm. You can buy your personalized attorney badge here. You can also obtain a personalized plaque to display in your office. If you believe another verdict should be on this list, please submit it to us today. All Rights Reserved.

Terms of Use Sitemap. HouseCanary Inc. Caldwell, Jason D. Cassady, J. Austin Curry, Christopher S. John Ward Jr. Apple Inc. Sheasby, Charlotte J. Samsung Electronics Co. Case: Estate of McPherson v. Jefferson Trucking L. Stahl, Eugene A.

TX: GUILTY VERDICT IN KAUFMAN DA MURDER

Branson, P. Case: Reavis v. Toyota Motor Corp.The Texas judicial system can be very confusing for those who are not familiar with it. The six types of trial courts in Texas include district courts, constitutional county courts, statutory county courts at law, statutory probate courts, justice of the peace courts, and municipal courts.

All of these courts permit jury trials and you could be summoned to serve in any of these courts. A criminal case results when a person, the defendant, is accused of committing a crime.

By presenting evidence at trial, the state, represented by the district or county attorney, must prove that the defendant committed the charges "beyond a reasonable doubt. A civil case results from a disagreement or dispute between two or more individuals or organizations. The party bringing the civil suit is the plaintiff.

The party being sued is the defendant. Civil suits usually involve disagreements about money or property, and no criminal violations are involved. In a civil case, you, as a juror, must answer questions of disputed facts based upon the testimony and evidence admitted by the Judge. The answers to these questions are called the verdict. While jury trials held in district court consist of 12 jurors, jury trials in county courts, probate courts, justice of the peace, and municipal courts consist of 6 jurors.

To return a valid verdict in criminal trials, jurors must reach a unanimous verdict. In civil trials, agreement of just five sixths of the jurors is sufficient to reach a valid verdict. Civil and criminal cases begin with the delivery of opening statements by the lawyers for the plaintiff and the defendant. Each lawyer will explain the case, their client's position, the evidence that they expect to present during the trial to support their claims and defenses, and the issues that you will be called upon to decide.

These statements are not evidence and should not be considered as such. After the opening statements, the parties will present the evidence to the jury. The evidence consists of the testimony of the witnesses and the exhibits presented and admitted at the trial. These exhibits are also available to the jury for further examination during the jury deliberations. Since you will be asked to make your decisions based upon all of the evidence admitted during the trial, it is very important that you give the court your strict attention during the entire proceedings.

The judge will also let you know whether you will be allowed to take notes during the trial. During the trial, the judge may need to address certain issues of law with the lawyers outside the presence of the jury. As a result, the judge may occasionally ask the jurors to leave the courtroom to allow the lawyers to make their legal arguments.

Remember that these periodic interruptions are important and necessary to ensure that the jury's verdict is based upon proper evidence, as determined by the judge under the Rules of Evidence. At the close of all the evidence, the judge will give the jury detailed instructions that identify the issues to be determined and the applicable laws in the case. The Charge of the Court will include a series of questions that the jury must answer after considering all of the evidence admitted during the trial.

Remember that while the judge determines issues of law, the jury must decide issues of fact and apply those facts to the law. Listen carefully to the instructions as they will guide your deliberations. Closing arguments give the lawyers for the parties the opportunity to make their final plea to the jury to explain why they believe their client should prevail. The lawyers may summarize the evidence and to try to persuade the jury to accept their client's view of the case.

While you should listen closely to the closing arguments, remember that what the lawyers say is not evidence. You should not make up your mind until you have heard all of the closing arguments and have had the opportunity to deliberate with your fellow jurors about the case. At the conclusion of the trial, following closing arguments and jury instructions, the jurors will leave the courtroom and go to a jury room to begin deliberations.

After reviewing the evidence at trial, the jury must decide how to answer the questions that were submitted to them by the court and return a verdict. The verdict must be based solely on the evidence presented by the parties, the Charge of the Court, and the rules of law provided by the judge.CNN Allison Jean took the stand first at Amber Guyger 's sentencing hearing Tuesday, hours after raising her hands in jubilation over the rare murder conviction of a former police officer in the death of her son, Botham.

Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what's happening in the world as it unfolds.

texas verdict

More Videos Watch moment verdict read in court for Amber Guyger. IRS deposits first coronavirus stimulus checks. Cuomo undecided on reopening businesses and schools. Holiday weekend severe storm outbreak. Trump says this is 'biggest decision' he will make. Surgeon general defends comments some found offensive. Hear from residents in Wuhan about life after lockdown. Avlon: How Trump has moved from denial to deflecting blame.

Sign up for our Crime & Courts newsletter

Fauci: The virus decides when the country will open back up. See difference between Trump and Pence's response to same question. New studies show where New York outbreak originated. Gupta's moving goodbye to child who changed his mind on CBD. California's early response helped to flatten the curve. How the government delayed coronavirus testing. Jobless claims surge for third week. CNN fact-checker says Trump is lying about voter fraud.

Jean and her daughter were largely composed as they addressed the jury, describing how losing Botham had upended their lives.

Top 100 Verdicts in Texas in 2016

Guyger, who is white, testified that after working long hours on September 6,she returned to her Dallas apartment complex. In uniform but off duty, she approached what she thought was her apartment. She noticed the door was partially open, saw a man inside who she believed to be an intruder, and fired her service weapon, killing him.

How Botham Jean's mother is preparing to face the former police officer who killed her son. In fact, she was at the apartment directly above hers -- which belonged to the year-old Jean, who was black. Prosecutors said Jean had been on the couch in his shorts, watching TV and eating vanilla ice cream when Guyger walked in.

Jurors deliberated for less than 24 hours before reaching the verdict. Though the topic of race did not figure prominently in the trial itself, outside the courtroom, Jean's case had became a focal point in the national conversation on policing and the threat of violence people of color face in daily life. After the verdict, S. Lee Merritt, an attorney for Jean's family, called the murder conviction a "huge victory" not only for the victim's family but also "for black people in America.

When African Americans are killed by police, these lawyers get a phone call.Student tech support techdesk law. Use this guide for research on juries at both the federal and state level. The federal right to a grand jury and jury in criminal and civil trials is laid out in the U. Constitution's 5th6th and 7th Amendments respectively, with ensuing legislation, case law, and regulations. Because the doctrine of selective incorporation has not made these provisions applicable to the states, one must research Texas law separately.

In general, when researching a legal topic, one should start with secondary sources to find the leading and most relevant primary law. Once you have some citations in hand, then look them up in primary sources. To stay abreast of legal developments throughout your research, make use of the resources listed under " Current Awareness. Please note, access to certain databases linked in this guide may be restricted to UT Law or the UT community; please see the library's Databases page that lays out access privileges.

Today's Operating Hours:. Juries and the Law A research guide for the role of juries in the law, laying out resources for current awareness, secondary sources, and jury instructions and verdicts. Introduction Use this guide for research on juries at both the federal and state level.

Jury Selection -- Texas Jury Selection -- United States Jury -- Texas Jury -- United States American Society of Trial Consultants Organization for information and commentary on all aspects of trial advocacy. Famous Trials Assemblage of materials from selected trials throughout history. From Douglas O. Courts on behalf of the Federal Judiciary. Fully Formed Jury Association A nonpartisan public policy research and education organization that focuses on issues involving the role of the jury in the justice system and the preservation of the full function of the jury as the final arbiter in our courts of law, including jury-nullification.

Jury and Democracy Project A group of academics studying the impact that jury service has on citizens. NCSC Center for Jury Studies From the National Center for State Courts, dedicated to facilitating the ability of citizens to fulfill their role within the justice system and enhancing their confidence and satisfaction with jury service by helping judges and court staff improve jury management. Includes comparative information about juries. Supreme Court. Report a problem. Subjects: Court-related Topics.

Email Facebook Twitter.A Harris County jury on Thursday convicted Ronald Haskell of capital murder, rejecting the former FedEx driver's claims of insanity in the massacre of the Stay family in Spring.

The Texas Reporter is now the Texas Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

The decision came after a month of testimony and about eight hours of deliberation in the gruesome shooting, which killed Katie and Stephen Stay and four of their five children.

The jury panel will now move to the punishment phase of the trial, and will decide whether to hand down a life sentence or the death penalty. The family Katie and Stephen Stay react after their killer, Ronald Haskell, was convicted in connection with the shooting deaths of the couple and four of their children. The only survivor of the tragedy, Cassidy Stay, was in the courtroom to witness the verdict. Haskell, now 39, arrived at the Stays' home on July 9,dressed in a Fed Ex uniform and carrying a makeshift "package.

Only Cassidy Stay, then 15, survived. She warned police that her former uncle might be heading to harm other family members, and authorities arrested him at the end of a short chase and lengthy standoff. Haskell's attorneys used an insanity defense, claiming that he was mentally ill at the time of the shooting and didn't know his actions were wrong. Prosecutors said he was a narcissist who was enacting vengeance on anyone who helped his ex-wife, who left him a year before after sustaining more than a decade of alleged abuse.

Joyce Stay, far left, reaches across and holds her granddaughter Cassidy Stay's hand as they react as Ronald Haskell is found guilty of capital murder in the shooting death of her parents on Thursday, Sept. Haskell was convicted of capital murder in connection with the massacre of a Spring family.

Stay is the only survivor of the shooting, in which her parents and siblings were shot to death in their home. Photo: Brett Coomer, Staff Photographer. Caption Close. Image 1 of Back to Gallery. Trending Now. Most Popular. Temporary bans won't help.Already a subscriber? Log in or Activate your account. The jury found her guilty instead, and Gloria Romero Perez was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

The judge, Jack Robison, is on the other end of a disciplinary measure. According to the Texas Judicial Commission, he walked into the jury room after the jury's deliberations, said he had been praying about the case, and informed the jurors God told him the defendant was innocent.

The Texas Judicial Commission's ruling said it received 18 complaints about Robison's conduct from sources, including jurors, the district attorney's office and concerned citizens who heard about his comments through media reports. Robison self-reported his actions to the state commission a week after the verdict. He wrote that he had been suffering memory lapses and couldn't explain why he'd broken protocol to try to inappropriately influence the case, but he said he'd been under extreme stress due to ongoing medical treatment and the recent death of a close friend.

Nine months after the original guilty verdict, a new judge ruled the sex trafficking case a mistrial, on grounds that Robison had made multiple biased comments throughout the trial. Robison testified before the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct last month, and the commission released its warning on Feb. The court documents show that Robison furnished letters from medical professionals to the judicial conduct panel, which concluded that Robison was not currently suffering from a mental illness.

The doctors determined Robison's actions were driven by delirium, a "temporary, episodic medical condition," according to the court papers. The doctors argued Robison's "fitness for duty" was not impaired. Even among regions that have the highest levels of violence outside a war zone, fewer people are being killed and fewer robberies are taking place.

Haskell found guilty of capital murder in Stay family deaths

No masks, gloves or other protective equipment has allowed infection to spread. Thanks for reading. Subscribe or log in to continue. Full access to STLtoday. Log In Become a Member. Dashboard Logout. Texas judge disciplined for asking jury to reverse verdict, saying God told him defendant was innocent. He asked the jury to reverse its guilty verdict. Jurors declined. The state stopped short of issuing a public sanction against Robison or suspending him.

Sign up! Related to this story. Most Popular. Law and order. Mar 25, Coronavirus hits hundreds of U. Mar 31, Notifications Settings. Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device. News Alerts Subscribe. Blues News Subscribe.