two branches of the Federal Government was unconstitutional.”) (citations omitted). 57 . TEX. EDUC. CODE § 45.003(d). 58 . W. Orange-Cove I, 107 S.W.3d at 584. 59 . Edgewood III, 826 S.W.2d at 503. 60 . Id. at 502. 61 . Edgewood IV, 917 S.W.2d at 738. 62 . W. Orange-Cove I, 107 S.W.3d at 582. 63 . Id. at 578-79 ("Thus, a single district states a claim under article VIII, section 1-e if it alleges that it is constrained by the State to tax at a particular rate.”). 64 . W. Orange-Cove I, 107 S.W.3d at 583. 65 . Mat 579. 66 . 176 S.W.3d at 796. 67 ng) ("I believe that the provisions of Senate Bill 7 which permit — in reality coerce — some school districts to pay t testimony that "laws of physics” kept wheel within wheel well was unreliable opinion); Coastal Transp., 136 S.W.3d at 232 (<HOLDING>); Kerr-McGee Corp. v. Helton, 133 S.W.3d 245,
holding that a conclusory opinion may be rejected holding experts testimony that continued use of allegedly defective probes showed conscious indifference was conclusory opinion holding that experts cursory testimony did not make his opinion conclusory because accompanying exhibit explained the basis for his conclusion holding that an experts opinion must be based on facts in evidence or within his or her knowledge and that the admission of an experts opinion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion holding that testimony was both speculative and conclusory