Young v. Hodde
George YOUNG, Petitioner, v. C.E. HODDE D/B/A Aggieland Harley-Davidson Et Al., Respondents
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, George Young, brought this suit against respondents, C.E. Hodde and Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act 1
for breach of express and implied warranties on a Harley-Davidson motorcycle sold him by Hodde. After respondents had answered, Young moved for a summary judgment on his claim. Hodde filed an answer to Young’s motion for summary judgment and also filed a counterclaim against Young seeking to recover for the cost of repairs to the motorcycle. Hodde then filed a motion for summary judgment on his counterclaim. Young filed a sworn denial to the counterclaim as well as a denial to Hodde’s motion, but did not amend his motion for summary judgment to seek affirmative relief on Hodde’s counterclaim.
The trial court granted Young’s motion for summary judgment and then rendered a judgment in the form of a final judgment which expressly denied all other relief sought in the cause. The court of appeals concluded that the trial court erred in rendering the take-nothing judgment on Hodde’s counterclaim because Young’s motion for summary judgment did not request *237 that relief. It reversed and remanded the cause to the trial court. 672 S.W.2d 45 .
We agree with the conclusion of the court of appeals that the trial court erred in rendering the take-nothing judgment against Hodde’s counterclaim in the absence of a motion for summary judgment by Young seeking that relief.
Teer v. Duddlesten, 664 S.W.2d 702 (Tex.1984). The court of appeals, however, implied that such an error in the rendition of a final judgment was jurisdictional in nature. The erroneous rendition of a final judgment is not fundamental error.
Teer, 664 S.W.2d at 704 ;
Schlipf v. Exxon Corp., 644 S.W.2d 453, 455 (Tex.1982). Here, Hodde complained of the erroneous final judgment in his appeal; therefore, the court of appeals properly considered it.
The application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.
1
. Tex.Bus. & Comm.Code Ann. § 17.41-.63.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 6 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding that trial court erred by granting plaintiff summary judgment on his claim and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim when plaintiff only moved for summary judgment on his claim)
-
(holding trial court errs in rendering take-nothing judgment against counter-claim in absence of motion for summary judgment by plaintiff seeking that relief)
-
(noting that a final judgment granting more relief than requested is not fundamental error and should be considered by an appellate court if presented as an issue on appeal)
-
(agreeing with the court of appeals’ conclusion that the trial court erred in rendering take-nothing judgment against respondent’s counterclaim in the absence of a motion for summary judgment by petitioner seeking that relief)
-
("erroneous rendition of a final judgment is not fundamental error” and is not "jurisdictional in nature”)
Cited by 50 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Joan DeYoung, Stephen DeYoung, M.D., and David DeYoung v. William L. Maynard, Individually and as of the Estate of Judy Page Maynard, and Maynard Properties, L.P.
- Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
- Elishah Sawyers, Pax Crate & Freight, Inc. and Robin Sawyers v. Marc Carter and Sally Carter
- In re George Green and Garlan Green
- Prewitt and Sampson v. City of Dallas
- Muston v. Nueces County Sheriff's Department
Most recent
- Rahim Muhammedi v. Barkat G. Ali
- U.S. Bank National Association as Legal Title Trustee for Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust v. Garson B. Silvers, Zeons, Inc., Athas Capital Group, Inc., Rama Fund, LLC, White Glass Lending, LLC, AMF Holdings, LLC, Seabrook Capital LLC
- Nexus Series B, LLC v. Durham Trading Partners XII, LLC
- Billy J. Davis, Gary Davis, and B.J. David Builder, Inc. v. John Crockett and Jennifer Crockett
- Teresa Marie Shield, Matthew Wilson, and Robert Heck v. Bio-Synthesis, Inc., DNA Testing Centre, Inc., and Rita Chen, Ph.D.
- Jeffrey Allen Rogers v. Kimberly Annette Coslett, Ralph Milton Suddath and Point Bank
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.