Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 789, 794 (Tex.2002) (personal jurisdiction). A relator who demonstrates that the order or judgment challenged is void need not demonstrate that remedy by appeal is inadequate. In re S.W. Bell Tel. Co., 35 S.W.3d 602, 605 (Tex.2000) (citing In re Dickason, 987 S.W.2d 570, 571 (Tex.1998)). A void judgment results when the trial court had (1) no jurisdiction over the parties or subject matter, (2) no jurisdiction to render the judgment, or (3) no capacity to “act as a court.” State ex rel. Latty v. Owens, 907 S.W.2d 484, 485 (Tex.1995). Errors that render a judgment merely voidable, as opposed to void, may be corrected through the customary appellate process or other proceedings. See id; see also Decker v. Lindsay, 824 S.W.2d 247, 249 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). It is well-settled that an order signed after 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that void order must exceed courts authority to act and not be merely erroneous (B) recognizing that acts made in violation of statutory authority are void (C) holding void judgment must be vacated (D) recognizing collateral attack on void order (E) recognizing that a state courts determination is not an unreasonable application of law merely because it is erroneous
Output (English): recognizing that a state courts determination is not an unreasonable application of law merely because it is erroneous