Case ID: sw_277/html/0624-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SPEER, J. CURETON, O. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JONES et al. v. HUGHES et ux.
    (No. 560-4303.)
    (Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.
    Dec. 2, 1925.)
    Appeal and error &wkey;>854(2)— Correct judgment on erroneous reasoning will not be reversed.
    Correct judgment on erroneous reasoning-will not be reversed.
    Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Tenth Supreme Judicial District.
    Suit by R. J. Jones and others against C. B. Hughes and wife. Judgment for defendants was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (265 S. W. 740), and plaintiffs bring error.
    Affirmed.
    Bailey, Nickels & Bailey, of Dallas, for plaintiffs in error.
    E. A. Rice and F. E. Johnson, both of Cle-burne, and R. S. Phillips, of Fort Worth, for defendants in error.
   SPEER, J.

The writ of error was granted in this case because of the apparent conflict with Union Carpet, etc., Co. v. George F. Miller Co., 38 Tex. Civ. App. 575, 86 S. W. 651. But the conflict is only apparent. In that case there was a finding by the jury against the plea in reconvention, which finding was entirely ignored by the judgment of the court. This, of course, was hn attempt to enter the judgment notwithstanding the verdict upon the material issues, and comes clearly within the condemnation of Ablowich v. Bank, 95 Tex. 431, 67 S. W. 79, 881. Besides, this case is controlled by the principle so often announced by the Supreme Court, that a correct judgment upon erroneous reasoning will not be reversed, and concretely applied in American Surety Company of New York v. Hill County (Tex. Com. App.) 267 S. W. 265, holding that where the trial court renders, under the facts, the only judgment that could be rendered, it will not be reversed for the want of a verdict from the jury actually impaneled to try the case.

We approve the reasoning and the conclusions of the Court of Civil Appeals, and recommend that its judgment be affirmed.

CURETON, O. J.

The judgment recommended in the report of the Commission of Appeals is adopted, and will be entered' as the judgment of the Supreme Court. 
      <gz^>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes