Americana Motel, Inc. v. Johnson
AMERICANA MOTEL, INC., Petitioner, v. Daniel K. JOHNSON, Respondent
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
The only point before us is whether an issue of fact has been raised so as to preclude summary judgment. The evidence before the trial judge at the summary judgment hearing consisted of the sworn pleadings of each party, an affidavit by the manager of the Americana Motel in support of its motion, and the Motel’s answers to interrogatories and request for admissions. The court of civil appeals reversed the summary judgment for the Motel, and remanded for trial. 604 S.W.2d 293 .
Sworn pleadings are not summary judgment evidence in Texas, Hidalgo v. Surety Savings and Loan Association, 462 S.W.2d 540, 545 (Tex.1971); nor are denials to a request for admissions.
Oliver v. Allstate Insurance Company, 456 S.W.2d 558, 560 (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1970, writ dism’d w.o.j.);
Sandone v. Dallas Osteopathic Hospital, 331 S.W.2d 476, 479 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo 1959, writ ref’d n.r.e.). The Motel manager’s affidavit contains a clear, positive, direct, and credible denial of any dealings with Johnson, and is free from any contradictions and inconsistencies elsewhere in the record. There being no other evidence before the trial court, summary judgment was correctly entered for the Motel.
We regard the holding of the court of civil appeals to be in conflict with Hidal-go, supra, and with Great American Reserve Insurance Company v. San Antonio Plumbing Supply Company, 391 S.W.2d 41, 47 (Tex.1965), which holds that uncontro-verted testimony by an interested party may support a summary judgment if it is “clear, direct and positive and there are no circumstances in evidence tending to discredit or impeach such testimony.” Accordingly, the writ of error is granted, and pursuant to Rule 483 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, we reverse the judgment *144 of the court of civil appeals without hearing argument, and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 7 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding that a party cannot use its own denials to requests for admissions to raise a fact issue to preclude summary judgment)
-
(noting that sworn pleadings are not summary-judgment evidence)
-
(upholding grant of summary judgment solely based on interested party affidavit)
-
(uncontroverted testimony by an interested party may support summary judgment when testimony is clear, direct, and positive)
-
(sworn pleadings are not summary judgment evidence)
Cited by 77 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- Tres Botes, LLC & Dos Botes Entertainment, Inc. v. Shree MAA Krupa Properties, LTD., & SDP Hotel, LLC
- Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund, LP and Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund II, LP v. Primexx Energy Corporation, M. Christopher Doyle, Angelo Acconcia, Blackstone Inc., Blackstone Holdings III LP, Blackstone EMA II LLC, BMA VII LLC, Blackstone Energy Management Associates II LLC, Blackstone Energy Partners II LP, Blackstone Management Associates VII LLC, Blackstone Capital Partners VII LP, BCP VII/BEP II Holdings Manager LLC, BX Primexx Topco LLC, and BPP Holdco LLC
- Patricia Y. Mayers v. United Independent School District
- Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund v. Primexx Energy Corporation
- Reynolds Energy Transport, LLC and Reynolds Transportation, Inc. v. Plains Marketing, L.P., Plains All American Pipeline, L.P., Plains Pipeline, L.P.
- the City of Austin v. Brandy Credeur
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.