Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc.

26 citing decisions · 20 quoted from the citing opinion itself

Where each one reaches back.

Every passage below is lifted verbatim out of the citing opinion, with the citation itself highlighted. Nothing here is a summary and nothing is generated — it is what the later court actually wrote.

• Boeckman2026-04-15
  …entations from the subsequent BCE and Duncan Trust investments. An intervening cause sufficient to break the chain of proximate causation must be independent of and unforeseeable from the original tortious conduct. Doe v. Boys Club of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). The Zoom meetings were 105 ECF No. 13 at 13. neither. They were allegedly arranged by Gross, acting as the Rochons’ agent, for the express purpose of further explaining the same platform to the same prospective investors he had been soliciting on the Rochons’ behal…
• Pennington2026-04-02
  …is a consumer; (2) the defendant committed a wrongful act under the DTPA; and (3) the act constituted a producing cause of the plaintiff’s damage. Crosswell v. Martinez, 120 F.4th 177, 188 (5th Cir. 2024) (citing Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995)). Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading standard applies to McKee’s DTPA claims. See id. at 188 (applying Rule 9(b) to DTPA claims). McKee satisfies some elements of his DTPA claims. First, McKee alleges he is a consumer under the DTPA. “To demonstrate consumer status under the DTPA, Plaintiffs must satisfy two requirements…
• Jodie Collins III v. San Antonio Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram2025-11-10
  …quires that the defendant have known the information and have failed to bring it to the plaintiff's attention.’” Washington v. U.S. Dept. of Hous. & Urban Dev., 953 F. Supp. 762, 777 (N.D. Tex. 1996) (quoting Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 479 (Tex. 1995)); see also Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 17.46(b)(24) (stating that it is unlawful to fail to “disclose information concerning goods or services which was known at the time of the transaction”). Liberally construing Collins’ allegations in the Amended Complaint as true, the Dealer- ship is correct that Collins has f…
• Morton2025-10-02
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Christian2025-06-20
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Murray2025-04-11
  …elements of a DTPA claim are that: “(1) the plaintiff is a consumer, (2) the defendant engaged in false, misleading, or deceptive acts, and (3) these acts constituted a producing cause of the consumer's damages.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex.1995) (citing Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.50(a)(1)). The Murrays assert claims under §§ 17.46(b)(2), (b)(5), and (b)(7) of the DTPA. (Docket Entry No. 1-3 at 14-15). These sections of the DTPA prohibit false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce. “[W]hen an insured joins claims unde…
• Collins2025-03-10
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Allen2025-02-13
  …fidavit was made long after Defendant’s alleged denial of access to Jeremy Allen’s account in 2022 and, therefore, could not have caused the damages alleged by Plaintiffs. Causation is an essential element of a DTPA cause of action. See Doe v. Boys Clubs, 907 S.W.2d 472, 477-82 (Tex. 1995) (addressing the causation element in both negligence and DTPA contexts); see also Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 17.50(a) (setting forth the producing cause standard of economic damages or mental anguish in the context of a DTPA claim). Thus, this claim likewise fails as a matter of law. While Plaintiffs als…
• White2024-11-26
  …nk, N.A., 2016 WL 1436430, at *7 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 11, 2016) (Fitzwater, J.) (citing Lee Lewis Constr., Inc. v. Harrison, 70 S.W.3d 778, 782 (Tex. 2001)). Proximate cause consists of cause in fact and foreseeability. Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). “The test for cause in fact is whether the negligent act or omission was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury, without which the harm would not have occurred.” Castillo v. Gared, Inc., 1 S.W.3d 781, 786 (Tex. App. 1999, pet. denied). “Cause in fact is not shown if the defendant[s’] negligence did no more than…
• PMA Insurance Group v. Polk Mechanical Company LLC2024-08-27
  …mited to the maintenance of the System. Under Texas law, “[t]he elements of a negligence cause of action are a duty, a breach of that duty, and damages proximately caused by the breach of duty.” Doe v. Boys Club of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex.1995) (citations omitted). Here, Polk argues that Plaintiff fails to provide any summary judgment evidence to establish that Polk provided maintenance on the System. Further, Plaintiff concedes that the Contract which forms the basis of its claims did not require Polk to perform maintenance on the System, since it was not within t…
• The Mark on 287 Owner LLC v. Croft LLC2024-08-20
  …¶¶ 51–57. The elements of a DTPA claim are “(1) the plaintiff is a consumer, (2) the defendant engaged in false, misleading, or deceptive acts, and (3) these acts constituted a producing cause of the consumer’s damages.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995). A consumer is defined as a person or entity who “seek[s] or acquire[s] goods or services by lease or purchase” and the good or services “must form the basis of the party’s complaint.” Fix v. Flagstar Bank, FSB, 242 S.W.3d 147, 159 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth…
• Gospel Light Eritrean Baptist Church v. The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company2024-07-25
  …ucing cause of the plaintiff's injury.”’ Huynh v. Walmart Inc., 30 F.4th 448, 453 (5th Cir. 2022) (quoting Bus. Staffing, Inc. v. Jackson Hot Oil Serv., 401 S.W.3d 224, 236 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012, pet. denied)); Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995). A “consumer” is “an individual . . . who seeks or acquires by purchase or lease, any goods or services.” TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.45(4). “Services” includes a “service purchased or leased for use, including services furnished in connection with the sale or repair of goods.” Id. § 17.45(2). There is no dispute that…
• Frank and Emma Persyn Family Limited Partnership v. Chicago Title of Texas LLC2024-04-25
  …87 (5th Cir. 1997) (citing El Chico Corp. v. Poole, 732 S.W.2d 306, 313 (Tex. 1987)). “Cause in fact is not shown if the defendant’s negligence did no more than furnish a condition which made the injury possible.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). Texas courts have explained that “furnishing a condition” means that the “evidence must go further, and show that such negligence was the proximate, and not the remote, cause of resulting injuries…. [and] justify the conclusion that such injury was the natural and probable result thereof.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall…
• Salt and Light Energy Equipment LLC v. Origin Bancorp2024-03-19
  …t enough on its own – the act “must also be a substantial factor in bringing about the plaintiff’s harm.” Lear Siegler Inc. v. Perez, 819 S.W.2d 470, 472 (Tex. 1991) (quoting RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 431 cmt. a (1965)); see also Doe v. Boys Clubs, 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). SNLEE fails to establish a fact issue regarding whether anything Origin said or did was a substantial factor in causing ProPetro to terminate SNLEE. “Under Texas law, causation generally is a question of fact for the jury.” Flock v. Scripto-Tokai Corp., 319 F…
• Hernandez2024-02-13
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Armont2024-02-05
  …ween the defendant and the plaintiff’s injuries simply may 11 be too attenuated to constitute legal cause.” Bos, 556 S.W.3d at 308 n.61 (quoting Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995)). “[A] lack of proximate cause may be established as a matter of law if the evidence is without material dispute and the circumstances are such that reasonable minds could not arrive at a different conclusion.” Phillips v. Tex. Dep’t of Crim. Just., 366 S.W.3d 312, 316 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012, no pet.). Nevertheless, to be a…
• Davenport2024-01-04
  …ould not have happened but for the defendant’s conduct, the connection between the defendant and the plaintiff’s injuries simply may be too attenuated to constitute legal cause.” Bos, 556 S.W.3d at 308 n.61 (quoting Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995)). “[A] lack of proximate cause may be established as a matter of law if the evidence is without material dispute and the circumstances are such that reasonable minds could not arrive at a different conclusion.” Phillips v. Tex. Dep’t of Crim. Just., 366 S.W.3d 312, 316 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012, no pet.); see Rogers, 518 S.W.3…
• Wilson2023-12-11
  …nk, N.A., 2016 WL 1436430, at *7 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 11, 2016) (Fitzwater, J.) (citing Lee Lewis Constr., Inc. v. Harrison, 70 S.W.3d 778, 782 (Tex. 2001)). Proximate cause consists of cause in fact and foreseeability. Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). “The test for cause in fact is whether the negligent act or omission was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury, without which the harm would not have occurred.” Castillo v. Gared, Inc., 1 S.W.3d 781, 786 (Tex. App. 1999, pet. denied) (citation omitted). “Cause in fact is not shown if the defendant’s negligence…
• Sevadjian2023-11-28
  …onable expectable public demand,206 represented that title conveyed rights or remedies which it does not have,207 represented that a guaranty or warranty has rights that it does not have,208 represented that 197 Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 479 (Tex. 1995). 198 Id. 199 Cruz, 364 S.W.3d at 823. 200 TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.46(b). 201 TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.46(b)(1); see also ECF No. 190, pg. 23. ¶ 8.I.a. 202 TEX. BUS. & COM.…
• Lozano2023-11-21
  …“Proximate cause has two elements: cause in fact and foreseeability.” W. Investments, Inc. v. Urena, 162 S.W.3d 547, 551 (Tex. 2005). The elements “cannot be established by mere conjecture, guess, or speculation.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995). “The test for cause in fact is whether the act or omission was a substantial factor in causing the injury without which the harm would not have occurred.” Id.; see also Rodriguez-Escobar v. Goss, 392 S.W.3d 109, 113 (Tex. 2013) (“For a negligent act or omission to have been a cause-in-fact of the harm, the act or omission…
• Doyle2023-10-30
  …s—caused Plaintiffs’ harm. See Gen. Motors Corp. v. Saenz ex rel. Saenz, 873 S.W.2d 353, 357 (Tex. 1993) (duty to warn ran to users of product, so causation analysis depended on the effect an allegedly inadequate warning had on users); Doe v. Boys Clubs, 907 S.W.2d 472, 477 (Tex. 1995) (assuming a duty to investigate personnel, causation depended on the consequences of defendant’s al- leged failure to investigate). Plaintiffs’ theory of duty does not match their theory of causation. Plaintiffs’ theory of duty is that Defendants should have warned the general public about the dangers of their products.…
• Boss Exotics LLC v. Crosta and Partners LLC2023-10-05
  …7 plaintiff is a consumer, (2) the defendant engaged in false, misleading or deceptive acts, and (3) these acts constituted a producing cause of the consumer’s damages.” Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dall., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995) (citing Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.50(a)(1)). The DTPA defines “consumer,” in relevant part, as “an individual, partnership, [or] corporation … who seeks or acquires by purchase or lease, any goods or services.” Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.54(4). To qualify as a consumer, “a person must have sought or acquired goods or service…
• Le2023-07-24
  …m would not have occurred but for that act or omission. Id. A harm is foreseeable where “a person of ordinary intelligence should have anticipated the danger created by the negligent act or omission.” Id. (quoting Doe v. Boys Club of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995)). Legal foreseeability does not require that the particular accident or peculiar chain of events should have been foreseen; “[a]ll that is required is that the injury be of such a general character as might reasonably have been anticipated; and that the injured party should be so situated with relation to the wron…
• Dyer2023-05-22
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Roe2023-03-25
  The citing opinion is in this library and the link is real, but the passage could not be quoted: this decision is named there in a short form, in a parallel reporter, or in text that came through OCR imperfectly. Recorded as unquoted rather than dropped.
• Bakri2023-02-07
  …d on a DTPA claim, a plaintiff must prove that (1) he or she is a consumer; (2) the defendant engaged in false, misleading, or deceptive acts; and (3) these acts were a producing cause of the consumer’s damages. Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex. 1995); TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE § 17.46. In insurance cases, “an insurer will not be faced with a tort suit for challenging a claim of coverage if there was any reasonable basis for denial of that coverage.” Higginbotham v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 103 F.3d 456, 460 (5th Cir. 1997). Nautilus argues that Bakri lacks evidence sho…