1
... SeeT ex . R
. App. P. 47. 4. 

## CO URT OF A PP EA LS S E C O N DD I ST R I CTO FT EXAS FORT WORTH NO . 0 2 - 0 9 - 0 0 3 0 1 - CV DE BORA H OL SON MONTOY A AP PE L L AN T V
. BL UEBON NET FI NANCI ALASS ETS APPEL L EE

--- --- --- --- F ROM TH E 3 0 TH DI STR I CT COUR T OF W I CHI TA COUNTY

--- --- --- --- 

## ME MORAND UMOP IN ION 1

--- --- --- --- I . I nt r oduc t i on A p p e l l a n t D e b o ra h O l s o n M o n toya a p p e a l s th e t ri a l co u rt ’ s g ra n t o f s u m m a ry j u d g m e n ti n f a v o ro fa p p e l l e e Bl u e b o n n e tF i n a n c i a l As s e t s . W e a ff i r m i n p a rtand re ve rs e i n p a rt.2 I I . Fa ct ual a nd Pr oce dur al Back gr ound C hase Bank U SA , N
. A. i ss ued a credi tcar d t o M ont oy a, who m ade purchas es wi t h t he c ar d and subs equent l ydef aul t ed on herac count . O n N ov em ber3, 2006, C h a s e B a n ks o ld th e a c c o u n t to C re d itM a xL L C . C re d itM a xth e n s o ld M o n to y a ’s acc ountt o Bur eaus I nv est m entG roup Portf ol i o N o. 10, LLC. Bur eaus I nv est m ent G ro u p P o rtfo li o N o . 1 0 , L L C s o ld M o n to ya ’s a c c o u n t to C re d it o r H o ld in g s , L L C d /b /a Bl uebonnetFi nanci al Asset s. Bl uebonnett he n s u e d Mo n t oy a f ort he unpa i d ac count bal ance on Sept em ber24, 2008. M o n toya a n s w e re d t h e su i t a n d f i l e d h e r ow n co u n terc l a i m f o r a d e c l a ra tory ju d g m e n t, a ll e g in g th a t B lu e b o n n e t’ s fi li n g th e s u it w a s w ro n g a n d w a s i n te n d e d to harass , i nt i m i dat e, and caus e herf i nanci al har m ; sh e al so fi l ed a count er cl ai m f or vi o l a ti o n s o f the f i n a n c e co d e a n d t h e T e xa s D e c e p ti ve T ra d e P ra c ti c e s A c t (D T P A ), a s w e ll a s i n te n ti o n a l in fl ictio n o f e m o ti o n a l d istre s s . B lu e b o n n e t file d a c ro s s c la im , d e n y in g th e a ll e g a t io n s in M o n to y a ’s c o u n te rc la im , a lle g in g th a t M o n to y a ’s c o u n te rc la im w a s “g ro u n d le s s a n d b ro u g h t in bad f ai t h f orpurposes ofharassm ent , ” and seeki ng a tt or ney’ s f ees a nd co urtcost s. B l ueb onn etal so serv ed M ont oya w i t h di scoveryr equ est s, i ncl udi ng i nt er roga t or i es, r equ est s f oradm i ssi ons, and r equ est s f orpr odu ct i on o fdocu m ent s and t hi ngs. M o n to ya p ro vid e d re s p o n s e s to th e re q u e s ts fo r a d m iss io n s b u t d id n o t re s p o n d to Bl uebonnet ’ s o t her di sc ov ery r eques t s. Bl uebonnet f i l ed a com bi ned t r adi t i onal and3

no- e v i d e n c e m o t i o n f o r s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t o n Fe b r u a ry 1 8 , 2 0 0 9 , wh i c h t he t r i al c o u rt g ra n te d
. M o n to ya n o wa p p e a ls. I I I . Di sc uss i on A . Pub l i c pol i cychal l enges In h e r fir s t tw o is s u e s , M o n to y a a rg u e s t h a t, a s a m a tte r o f p u b licp o licy , c re d it card debtsh oul d notbe a ss i gnabl e t o t hi rd- partydebtco l l ect ors a nd t hatdebt c o lle c to rs s h o u ld n o t b e a b le to r e c o v e r o n t h e s e d e lin q u e n t c re d it c a rd a c c o u n ts via t he s t at ed ac countca use ofact i on. Mont oy a di d notrai se t hese i ss ues i n t he t r i al court ; i nst ead, sh e argues t hem f ort he f i rstt i m e i n t hi s a ppe a l
. T o p re serv e a c o m p la in t fo r a p p e lla te re v ie w , a p a rtym u s t h a v e p re s e n te d to th e tria l c o u rta tim e ly r eques t , obj ect i on, orm ot i on t hatst at es t he s peci f i c g rounds f ort he des i r ed r ul i ng, i f the y a re n o t a p p a re n t fro m t h e co n text o f the req u e s t, o b j e c ti o n , o r m o ti o n . T e x. R . A p p . P . 3 3 .1 (a ); see a l soT ex . R
. E v i d. 103( a) ( 1)
. I fa pa rtyf ai l s t o do t hi s, er ror is n o t p re s e rve d , a n d th e c o m p la in t i s w a ive d
. Bus h e l l v. De an , 8 0 3 S
. W
. 2d 711,2
... Er rori s n otwai v ed i fi tf al l s wi t hi n t he nar row cat egoryof“ f undam ent al

e rro r,” w h ich re q u ire s n o tri a l c o u rt p re d ica te fo r a p p e ll a te re vie w . Inr eB
. L
. D. , 113 S .W .3 d 3 4 0 , 3 5 0 (T e x. 2 0 0 3 ), cert. denied, 541 U
. S. 945 ( 2004)
. Fundam ent al er ror ex i st s i n t hose i nst ances i n w hi ch er rordi r ect l yand adv ersel yaff ect s t he i nt er estof t he publ i c g eneral l y , as t hat i nt er est i s d ecl ar ed byt he s t at ut es orco nst i t ut i on ofour st at e, ori nst ances i n whi ch t he record aff i r m at i v el yand conc l usi v el ysh ows t hatt he c o u rt re n d e rin g th e j u d g m e n t w a s w it h o u t j u ris d ictio n o f t h e s u b je c t m a tte r. Mack Truck s, Inc. v. Tam ez, 206 S. W
. 3d 572, 577 ( T ex . 2006)
. M ont oy a does notco nt end on appe al t hatt he i ss ue oft hi rd- partydebtco l l ect ors’ su i ng t o c ol l ecton d el i nquent accou nt s i s one t hati nvokes t he f und am ent al - er rordoct r i ne, and we d e c l i n e t o so hol d. 4 7 1 2 (T e x. 1 9 9 1 ) ( o p . o n reh ’ g ). B e c a u s e M o n toya ’ s p u b licp o l i c y a rg u m e n ts a re 2 unp r eserv ed, we do no tadd r ess t hem
. W e over r ul e he rf i rstand secon d i ssues. B. Bl uebo nnet ’ s “ Tr adi t i onal ” M ot i on f orSum m aryJ udgm ent In p a rt o f h e r th ird i s s u e , M o n to ya a rg u e s th a t B lu e b o n n e t w a s n o t e n ti tl e d to sum m aryj udgm entbec ause t he ev i dence di d notco ncl usi v el yes t abl i sh al l es sent i al e l e me n t s o f i t s a c c o u n t s t a t e d c a u s e o fa c t i o n . I n h e rf o u rt h i s s u e , M o n t o y a c l a i ms th a t B lu e b o n n e t w a s n o t e n title d to s u m m a ryju d g m e n t o n its q u a n tu m m e ru it c la im becau se the ev i dence es t abl i shed t hatt he part i es wer e i n an ex pr ess co nt r act ual r el at i onshi p, and she di sagrees wi t h t he am ount cl ai m ed. And i n her si xt h i ss ue, sh e c o m p la in s th a t B lu e b o n n e t w a s n o t e n ti tl e d to s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n e it h e r it s t r adi t i ona l orno-ev i den ce sum m aryj udg m entm ot i ons. 1. St andard ofR ev i ew W e r e v ie w a s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t d e n o vo . Mann Fr ankf ort Stei n & Li pp A d vi sor s, Inc. v. Fieldi

ng , 2 8 9 S. W
. 3 d 8 4 4 , 8 4 8 ( Tex
. 2 0 0 9 )
. W e c o n s i d e rt he5

evi den ce present ed i n t he l i ght m ost f avorabl e t o t he n onm ovant , cr edi t i ng e v i den ce f avorabl e t o t he n onm ovanti fre ason abl e j ur or s coul d, and di sr ega rdi ng e v i den ce c o n tra ry to th e n o n m o va n t u n le s s r e a s o n a b le j u ro rs c o u ld n o t. Id. W e i n d u l g e e ve ry re a s o n a b le i n fe re n c e a n d r e s o lve a n y d o u b ts i n th e n o n m o va n t’ s fa vo r. 208 01, Inc. v. Par ker , 2 4 9 S .W .3d 3 9 2 , 3 9 9 (T e x. 2 0 0 8 ). Ap l a i n ti ffi s e n ti tl e d t o su m m a ry j udgm enton aca use ofact i on i fi t conc l usi v el y prov es al l ess ent i al el em ent s o ft he c la im
. See T e x. R . C iv. P . 1 6 6 a (a ), (c ); MM P, Ltd. v. Jo nes , 710 S. W
. 2d 59, 60 (T e x. 1 9 8 6 ). 2. A ccoun tSt at ed A partyi s ent i t l ed t o r el i eff ora s t at ed ac countwhen ( 1) t r ansact i ons between t he p art i es gi v e r i se t o i nde bt edn ess ofone t o t he ot her; ( 2) an ag r eem ent , ex pr ess ori m pl i ed, between t he part i es f i x es an am ount due; and ( 3) t he one t o be charged m a k e s a p ro m ise , e xp re s s o r im p li e d , to p a y th e i n d e b te d n e s s . D ulong v. Cit i bank ( S. D. ) , N. A. , 2 6 1 S .W .3d 8 9 0 , 8 9 3 (T e x. A p p .— D a l l a s 2 0 0 8 , n o p e t. ). M o n toya ass ert s t hatt he part i es di d nothav e an agr eem entt hatf i x ed t he am ountdue becau se she di d notagr ee t hatt he s um of$10, 058. 07 was t he am ountowi ng on t he a c c o u n t. B l u e b o n n e t’ s su m m a ry j u d g m e n t e vi d e n c e i n c l u d e d M o n toya ’ s cre d i t c a rd s t a t e m e n t s f ro m Ap r i l 2 0 0 5 t o J u n e 2 0 0 6 ; t h e l a s ts t a t e m e n ts h o ws a $ 9 , 1 0 1
. 76 bal ance due. Th e N ov em ber3, 2006 bi l l ofsa l e f rom C hase Bank’ s s al e oft he a c c o u n t t o C re d it M a x s h o w s a $ 1 0 ,0 5 8 .0 7 fi n a l b a la n c e d u e . T h e s a le d o c u m e n ts3
... M ont oya does not cont est t hat she had an agreem entwi t h C hase B ank.

H owev er , t he record does notco nt ai n ev i dence ofal l t he t er m s and condi t i ons oft he part i es’ a g ree m e ntf rom whi ch we m i ghthav e been abl e t o det er m i ne how t he d iffe re n c e b e tw e e n th e tw o fi g u re s w a s d e rive d
. 6 f ort he nexttwo sal es of t he ac count— f rom C r edi t M axt o Bur eaus I nv est m entG roup P o rtfo li o N o . 1 0 a n d th e n fro m B u re a u s In ve s tm e n t G r o u p P o rtfo li o N o . 1 0 to B lu e b o n n e t— a ls o lis t th e a m o u n t d u e a s $ 1 0 ,05 8 .07
. T h e a d o ra S tr o o , B lu e b o n n e t’s m a n a g e r , s t a t e d i n h e r a ff i d a v i t t h a t Bl u e b o n n e t ’ s c l a i m a g a i n s t Mo n t oy a f or $10, 058. 07 was “j ustand t r ue”and t hat“ al l j ustand l awf ul off set s, pay m ent s[ , ] and c re d it s h a ve b e e n a ll o w e d .” H o w e v e r, th e re c o rd d o e s n o t c o n ta in s ta te m e n ts ite m iz in g th e in c re a s e s in t he bal ance f oranyoft he m ont hs between t he Ju n e 2006 st at em entand t he N ov em ber2006 sal e, nori s t he m et hod ofcal cul at i ng i nt er esti ncl uded t o ex pl ai n t he $956. 31 di ff er ence between what Mont oy a owed i n J une and whatwas sol d by C h a s e B a n ki n N o ve m b e r. Ther ef or e, Bl uebonnet ’ s o wn sum m aryj udgm ent 3 e vid e n c e c re a te s a fa c t i s s u e w it h re g a rd to th e fi xe d a m o u n t d u e . See D ulong , 261 S .W .3 d a t 8 9 3
. W e s u s ta in th is p o rtio n o f M o n to ya ’s th ird iss u e . S ee, e . g. , FFP Mktg C o . v. L o n g

L a n eMa s te r T

ru s t I V, 1 6 9 S .W .3d 4 0 2 , 4 1 2 – 1 3 (T e x. A p p .— F o rt W ort h 2005, no p et . ) ( hol di ng, i n c ont extofco l l ect i on on not es, t hatsi nce an am bi gui tyex i st ed i n t he s um m a ryj udgm entproofas t o t he am ountdue, r ev ersal was app ropr i at e)
. Becaus e ofourdi spos i t i on oft hi s p ort i on ofM ont oy a’ s t hi rd i ss ue, we need n o ta d d ress herot herco nt ent i ons wi t h r egard t o Bl uebonnet ’ s t r adi t i onal7

m ot i on f or sum m ary j udgm ent f or acc ount st at ed i n t he rem ai nderofhert hi rd i ss ue. SeeT e x. R . A p p . P . 4 7 .1
. 3 . Q u a n tu m M e ru it Q u a n tu m m e ru iti s a n e q u it a b le re m e d y in d e p e n d e n t o f a p a rticu la r c o n tra c t, and a pa rtym ay recoverund erqua nt um m er ui tonl ywh en t here i s no expr ess co n t ract co veri n g t h e se rv i ce s or m a t e ri a l s f u rni sh e d
. Ja ra m illov. P o rtfo lio Acqui sit ions, LLC , N o . 1 4 -0 8 -0 0 9 3 9 -C V , 2 0 1 0 W L1 1 9 7 6 6 9 , a t *7 (T e x. App.— H oust on [ 14t h D i st . ] M ar . 30, 2010, no p et . ) ( m em . op)
. To r ecov erunder quant um m er ui t , a pl ai nt i ffm ustprov e t hat( 1) v al uabl e s erv i ces wer e r ender ed or m at er i al s f ur ni shed, ( 2) t o t he def endant , ( 3) whi ch t he def endantus ed and enj oy ed, (4 ) u n d e r c irc u m s ta n c e s th a t re a s o n a b ly n o ti fi e d th e d e fe n d a n t th a t th e p la in ti ff e xp e c te d to b e p a id fo r th e s e rvic e s o r m a te ria ls. Id
. The m easure ofr ecov eryf or a q u a n tu m m e r u itc la im is th e re a s o n a b le va lu e o f th e s e rv ic e s o r m a te ria ls fu rn ish e d
. L a m a

ja k , In c . v. Fra z

in , 230 S. W
. 3d 795, 796 ( T ex . App. — D al l as 2007, n o p e t.); H udsonv. C ooper , 1 6 2 S .W .3 d 6 8 5 , 6 8 8 (T e x. A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D ist.] 2 0 0 5 , n o p e t.). N o tw it h s ta n d in g w h e th e r th e c re d itc a rd s ta te m e n ts a n d o th e r d o c u m e n ts ent er ed i n ev i dence byBl uebonnetes t abl i sh an ex pr ess co nt r act ual re l at i onshi p t hat w o u ld p re c lu d e B lu e b o n n e t’s q u a n tu m m e ru it c la im , th e ya ls o s h o wth e re a s o n a b le v al ue oft he s erv i ces orm at e ri a l s f ur ni shed t o Mont oy a as $9, 101. 76, and nott he $10, 058. 07 c l ai m ed byBl uebonnet
. The re f or e, t he s am e f acti ss ue precl udi ng4
... M ont oy a does not chal l enge t he t r i al co urt ’ s g r antofsu m m aryj udgm ent

o n h e rd e c l a r a t o ryj u d g me n tc o u n t e r c l a i m. 8 s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t o n B l u e b o n n e t’ s a c c o u n t s tate d cla i m a l s o p re c l u d e s su m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n i ts q u a n tu m m e ru itc la im
. See Lam aj ak, 2 3 0 S
. W
. 3 d a t 7 9 6
. W e s u s ta in M o n to ya ’s fo u rth i s s u e a n d th e p o rtio n o f h e r s ixth i s s u e p e rta in in g to B lu e b o n n e t’ s tra d it io n a l s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. C. Bl uebo nnet ’ s No- Ev i denc e M ot i on f orSum m aryJ udgm ent B lu e b o n n e t m o v e d fo r a n o -e v id e n c e s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n M o n to y a ’s count er cl ai m s, ar gui ng t hatt her e w a s “ no ev i dence ofeac h and ev eryel em entof e a c h o f [M o n toya ’ s ] c a u s e s o f a c ti o n i n h e r c o u n terc l a i m .” In he r fi ft h i s s u e , M o n toya a s s e rts th a t t h e no -evi d e n ce su m m a ryj u d g m e n tw a s i m p ro p e r b e c a u s e a n a d e q u a te t i m e f ordi sc ov eryhad notpassed. I n partofhersi xt h i ss ue, sh e c hal l enges t he noev i denc e s u m m a ryj u d g m e n tb ya r g u i n g t h a tBl u e b o n n e te i t h e ri n c o r r e c t l ys e tout t he el em ent s o ral t oget herf ai l ed t o s etoutt he el em ent s o fherco unt er cl ai m s f or i n t e n t i o n a l i n f l i c t i on ofe m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s , f i n a n c e c o d e v i o l a t i o n s , a n d DTPA v i ol at i ons. Sh e f urt her ar gue s t hatt he m ot i on f ai l ed t o p rope r l yi den t i fyt hose

4 el em ent s o fherca uses ofact i on f orwhi ch t her e was no ev i dence
. 1. St andard ofR ev i ew Aft eran a dequat e t i m e f ordi sc ov ery, the partywi t houtt he burden ofproof m ay , wi t hout pr esent i ng ev i dence , m ov e f or sum m ary j udgm ent on t he ground t hat t her e i s n o ev i dence t o s upportan e ss ent i al el em entoft he nonm ov ant ’ s c l ai m or9

d e fe n s e . T e x. R . C iv. P . 1 6 6 a (i). T h e m o ti o n m u s t s p e c if ica ll y sta te th e e le m e n ts fo r w h ich th e re i s n o e vid e n c e . Id. ; T i mpte Indu s. , Inc. v. G i sh , 286 S
. W
. 3d 306, 310 ( T ex . 2009)
. T he t r i al co urtm ustgrantt he m ot i on unl ess t he nonm ov antproduce s s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t e vid e n c e th a t ra ise s a g e n u in e i s s u e o f m a te ria l fa c t. SeeT e x. R . C iv. P . 1 6 6 a (i) & c m t.; Ham i lton v. Wi

l son , 2 4 9 S .W .3d 4 2 5 , 4 2 6 (T e x. 2 0 0 8 ). W h e n revie w i n g a n o -e vi d e n c e su m m a ry j u d g m e n t, w e e xa m i n e t h e e n ti re re c o rd in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o ra b le to th e n o n m o v a n t, in d u lg in g e v e ryre a s o n a b le in fe re n c e a n d re s o lvi n g a n y d o u b ts a g a in s t t h e m o ti o n . Sudan v. Sudan , 199 S. W
. 3d 291, 292 ( T ex . 2006)
. W e revi e w a no - ev i dence su m m aryj udgm entf or e v id e n c e th a t w o u ld e n a b le re a s o n a b le a n d fa ir- m in d e d ju ro r s t o d iffe r in th e ir c o n c lu s io n s . Ham i

lton , 249 S. W
. 3d at426 ( ci t i ng Cit y o f Ke l le r v. Wilson , 168 S
. W
. 3 d 8 0 2 , 8 2 2 (T e x . 2 0 0 5 )) . W e c re d it e v id e n c e fa v o ra b le to th e n o n m o v a n t if r eason abl e j urors c oul d , a n d w e di sregard ev i dence co nt r aryt o t he nonm ov ant u n le s s r e a s o n a b le j u ro rs c o u ld n o t. T i mpte Indu s. , Inc. , 286 S. W
. 3d at310 ( quot i ng Mack T rucks, Inc. , 206 S. W
. 3d at582)
. I ft he nonm ov antbr i ngs f orwar d m or e t han a s ci nt i l l a ofprobat i v e ev i dence t hatr ai ses a genui ne i ss ue ofm at er i al f act , t hen a n o -e vid e n c e s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t is n o t p ro p e r. S m ithv. O ’ D o n n e ll, 288 S. W
. 3d 417, 4 2 4 (T e x. 2 0 0 9 ). 2 . A d e q u a te T i m e f o r D i s c o ve ry W hen a partyco nt end s t h a ti thas nothad an adeq uat e opport uni tyf or d is c o v e ryb e fo re a s u m m a ryju d g m e n t h e a rin g , it m u s t file e ith e r a n a ffid a v it5
... I n herf i ft h i ss ue, a s p artofherar gum entt hatsh e di d nothav e an

a d e q u a te tim e fo r d is c o v e ry , M o n to y a p o in ts o u t th a t B lu e b o n n e t file d a c ro s s c la im a g a i n s t M o n toya six da ys b e fore i t fi l e d i ts m o ti o n for s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t. H o w e ve r, s h e d o e s n o ta r g u e t h a ts u mma ryj u d g me n tw a s i n a p p ro p r i a t e o n t h e c ro s s c l a i m. T her ef or e, we aff i r m t he t r i al co urt ’ s g r antofsu m m aryj udgm ent a nd award of a tto rn e y’s fe e s o n th is c la im
. 10 e xp la in in g th e n e e d fo r fu rth e r d isc o ve ry o r a ve rifi e d m o ti o n fo r c o n ti n u a n c e . See Tenneco Inc. v. Enter. Prods. C o. , 9 2 5 S. W
. 2 d 6 4 0 , 6 4 7 ( Te x . 1 9 9 6 ) ( c i t i n g Te x . R. C iv. P . 1 6 6 a (g ), 2 5 1 , 2 5 2 ). M o n to ya d id n e it h e r. T he dec i si on t o al l ow M ont oy a m or e t i m e f ordi sco verywas wi t hi n t he t r i al c o u rt’s d isc re ti o n . See id. Part i cul ar l yi n l i ghtoft he f actt hatM ont oy a had prov i ded no respon se t o t he bul k of Bl uebonnet ’ s di sc ov ery r eques t s— i ncl udi ng r eques t s f or anyand al l doc um ent s su pport i ng heral l egat i ons agai nstBl uebonnetand i nt er rog at or i es s ee k i ng t he r ea s on s b eh i nd h erc l ai m t ha ts he d i d no to we B lu e b o n n e t o n th e a c c o u n t a s a ll e g e d — th e tria l c o u rtc o u ld h a v e re a s o n a b ly conc l uded t hatm or e t i m e woul d not r esul t i n any addi t i onal di sc ov ery . W e hol d t hat t he t r i al courtdi d notabus e i t s d i sc r et i on bydet er m i ni ng t hatan a dequat e t i m e f or d i s c o ve ry ha d p a s s e d w i th re g a rd t o B l u e b o n n e t’ s n o -e vi d e n c e m o ti o n fo r su m m a ry j udgm ent , and we ov er r ul e Mont oy a’ s f i ft h i ss ue. 5 3 . N o E v i dence R ai si ng a G enui ne I ssue ofM at er i al Fact R u l e 1 6 6 a (i ) do e s n o t re q u ire a p a rty m o vi n g f o r a n o -e vi d e n c e su m m a ry j udgm entt o s t at e al l t he el em ent s o fi t s o pponent ’ s c l ai m s, buti tdoes r e qui r e t he m o t i o n t o “ s t at e t he el e m e n t s a s t o w h i c h t h e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e . ” Te x . R. Ci v . P.11

166a( i )
. The t r i al co urtm ustgrantt he m ot i on unl ess t he nonm ov antproduce s s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t e vid e n c e th a t ra ise s a g e n u in e i s s u e o f m a te ria l fa c t. SeeT e x. R . C iv. P . 1 6 6 a (i) & c m t.; Ham i lton , 24 9 S
. W
. 3 d at426. I ft he nonm ov antbr i ngs f orwar d m o r e t h a n a s c i n t i l l a o f p ro b a t i v e e v i d e n c e t h a t r a i s e s a g e n u i n e i s s ue of m a t e ri a l f a ct, t h e n a n o -evi d e n ce su m m a ry j u d g m e n t i s no t p ro p e r. S m it h , 288 S .W .3 d a t 4 2 4
.

a. I nt ent i onal I nf l i ct i on o fEm ot i onal D i st r ess M ont oy a’ s c ount er cl ai m f ori nt ent i onal i nf l i ct i on ofem ot i onal di st r ess r equi r es p ro o f th a t (1 ) th e d e fe n d a n t a c te d in te n tio n a lly o r r e c k le s s ly, (2 ) th e d e fe n d a n t’s condu ctwas ext r em e and out r ageous , ( 3) t he def endant ’ s a ct i ons caused t he pl ai nt i ffem ot i onal d i st r ess , and ( 4) t he resul t i ng em ot i onal di st r ess was sev er e. T i l le r v. M c L u re , 121 S
. W
. 3d 7 09, 713 ( T ex. 200 3)
. “ S ever e em ot i ona l di st r ess” m e a n s d i s tre s s s o s e ve re t h a t n o rea s o n a b l e p e rso n co u l d b e e xp e c ted t o e n d u re itw it h o u t u n d e r g o in g u n re a s o n a b le s u ffe rin g . Union Pac. R
. R
. C o. v. Loa , 153 S .W .3d 1 6 2 , 1 7 0 (T e x. A p p .— E l P a s o 2 0 0 4 , n o p e t. ). A n y p a rty se e k i n g rec o ve ry f orm ent al angui sh, ev en when adv anci ng a caus e of act i on t hat does notr equi r e t he “se ve re ” da m a g e s req u i re d f o r inte n ti o n a l in fl i c ti o n o f e m o ti o n a l d i s tre s s , m u s t p ro ve m o re t h a n “m e re w o rry, a n xi e ty, ve xa ti o n , e m b a rras s m e n t, o r an g e r. ” Par kway C o. v. Wo o dru ff

, 9 0 1 S .W .2 d 4 3 4 , 4 4 4 (T e x. 1 9 9 5 ). Bl uebonnetas sert ed i n i t s m ot i on f orsu m m aryj udgm entt hatt her e was no e v id e n c e o f m e n ta l a n g u is h o r e m o tio n a l d is tr e s s c a u s e d to M o n to y a . M o n to y a , in12

t ur n, poi nt s t o heraff i d a vi tatt ached t o herr espon se t o Bl uebonnet ’ s m ot i on as ra is in g m o re th a n a s c in tilla o f e v id e n c e o f h e r c la im . M o n to y a s ta te d in h e r a ffid a v it th a ts h e h a d re c e ive d “o b n o x io u s a n d u n p le a s a n t” p h o n e c a lls fro m B lu e b o n n e t’s a tto rn e y a n d th a t t h e c re d it o r h a d d e c e ive d h e rw it h re g a rd to th e i n te re s t ra te charged on hercredi tca rd bal ance. Mont oy a s t at ed t hatas a resul t , sh e had bee n i n j ur ed “ i n hav i ng t o def end t hi s s ui t , i n dam age t o m ycredi t , i n m ent al angui sh, [ and] i n aggrav at i on ofm yex i st i ng pai nf ul phy si cal l ydebi l i t at i ng c o n d i t i o n s. ” She prov i des no f act s e x pl ai ni ng ei t hert he nat ur e ordegree of her “ m ent al angui sh”or t he d et ai l s ofher “ deb i l i t at i ng co ndi t i ons” an d how t hey were aggrav at ed. T hese unsup port ed, co ncl usoryst at em ent s a re n o tpropersu m m aryj udgm entev i dence
. S ee El D or adoM otor

s, Inc. v. K

och , 168 S. W
. 3d 360, 366 ( T ex . App. — D al l as 2005, n o p e t.); D olcef

i no v. R andol

ph , 1 9 S .W .3 d 9 0 6 , 9 3 0 (T e x. A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D i st . ] 2002, pet . deni ed)
. Furt her , t hese general st at em ent s o f“ m ent al angui sh”and

“ aggrav at i on”do notr i se t o t he l ev el ofdi st r ess so se v er e t hatno reason abl e person c o u ld b e e xp e c te d to e n d u re i t. See Union Pac. , 153 S
. W
. 3d at1 7 0
. B e c a u se M ont oy a di d notprod uce m or e t han a sc i nt i l l a ofev i dence ofse v er e em ot i onal d i s tre s s , w e h o l d t h a t t h e tri a l co u rtd i d n o t e rr b y g ra n ti n g a n o -e vi d e n c e su m m a ry j u d g me n to n M o n t o y a ’ s i n t e n t i o n a l i n f l i c t i o n o fe mo t i o n a l d i s t r e s s c l a i m.

b. Fi nanc e Code Vi ol at i ons M ont oy a al so broughta c ount er cl ai m a l l e g i ng t hatBl uebonnethad v i ol at ed s e c ti o n s 3 9 2 .30 1 a n d 3 9 2 .30 2 o f the f i n a n c e co d e , w h i c h p ro h i b i t d e b t c o l l e c tors13

f rom us i ng t hr eat s, coerci on, harass m ent , or abuse t o c ol l ectdebt s. Tex. Fi n. C ode Ann. §§ 3 92. 301–. 302 ( Ver non 200 6)
. Mont oy a al l eged t hatt hi s c ount er cl ai m had ar i sen f rom t he m i srepr esent at i ons m ade t o her at t he t i m e t hat she agr eed t o ent er in to c re d it c a rd tra n s a c ti o n s w it h C h a s e B a n k a n d fro m B lu e b o n n e t’ s c o n d u c t w it h r egard t o debtco l l ect i on act i ons. Bl uebonnet ’ s s um m aryj udgm entm ot i on chal l eng ed t hi s coun t er cl ai m byassert i ng t hatt here was n o evi den ce of any condu ct vio la ti n g t h e s e s e c ti o n s . In re s p o n s e , M o n to ya a g a in re li e d u p o n h e r a ffi d a vit t o p ro v i d e e v i d e n c e o fh e rc o u n t e r c l a i m. I n heraff i dav i t , M ont oy a s t at ed t hatsh e had r ecei v ed l ett ers and “ obnox i ous and unp l easan t ” ph o ne c al l s f rom Bl uebonnet ’ s l awy er ’ s o ff i ce. She cl ai m ed t hat s h e h a d re p e a te d ly to ld th e c a lle rs to c o n ta c t h e r a tto rn e y , le a v e h e r a lo n e , a n d q u it c a ll in g h e r. N e v e rth e le s s , a fte r s h e h a d b e e n s e rve d w it h th e u n d e rlyin g l a w s u it , Bl uebonnet ’ s l awy erl efthera ph one m ess age s t at i ng, “ N ow t haty ou’ v e been serv ed[ , ] pl ease cont actouroff i ce i m m edi at el y . ” Bl uebonnet ’ s l awy erca l l ed M o n to y a a g a in a fte r M o n to y a ’s la w y e r file d a n a n s w e r in th e s u it, b u t M o n to y a to ld the ca l l e r t o co n tac t h e r attorn e y a n d h u n g u p t h e p h o n e o n t h e ca l l e r. W hi l e B l ueb onn et ’ s coun sel ’ s pho ne c al l s m ay have bee n un we l com e an d uni nv i t ed, M ont oy a’ s a ff i dav i tco nt ai ns no al l egat i on t hatB l uebonnetori t s c ounse l u s e d o r attem p ted to u s e th re a ts o r c o e rcio n o r th a t t h e y o p p re s s e d o r ab u s e d h e r. SeeT ex . Fi n. C ode Ann. §§ 3 92. 301–. 302. Sect i on 392. 302 prohi bi t s d ebt col l ect or s f rom m aki ng repeat ed o rcont i nuo us ph one cal l s wi t h t he i nt entt o ha r ass14

a person att he c al l ed num ber , butev en i fM ont oy a’ s a ff i dav i t i s som e ev i dence of r epeat ed orco nt i nuous phone cal l s, i tnev ert hel ess pr ov i des no f act s s howi ng t hat B lu e b o n n e t’ s c o u n s e l m a d e th e p h o n e c a ll s w it h th e i n te n t t o h a ra s s h e r. See id. § 392
. 302 ( 4)
. B ecau se M ont oya di d no tpr odu ce m or e t han a sci nt i l l a ofev i den ce t hatBl uebonnetus ed s t at ut or i l yprohi bi t ed debt col l ect i on m et hods, we hol d t hatt he tr ia l c o u rtd id n o t e rrb yg ra n tin g a n o -e v id e n c e s u m m a ryju d g m e n t o n M o n to y a ’s f i n a n c e c o d e v i o l a t i o n c l a i m.

c. DTPAVi ol at i ons M ont oy a’ s DT PA co unt er cl ai m al l eged t hatB l uebonnetw as l i abl e undert he D T PA bas ed on m i srepr esent at i ons m ade by t he or i gi nal credi tca rd i ss uerand on th e fi n a n c e c o d e vio la ti o n s d isc u s s e d a b o ve . T h e D T P A a u th o riz e s a c o n s u m e r to sue when a f al se, m i sl eadi ng, ordecept i v e actorpract i ce upon whi ch t he c onsum er det r i m ent al l yr el i es i s aprodu ci n g cause ofec onom i c d am ages ordam ages f or m e n ta l a n g u ish
. See T e x. B u s . & C o m . C o d e A n n . § 1 7 .50 (a ) (V e rn o n S u p p . 2 0 0 9 ). Bl uebonnet ’ s n o- ev i dence m ot i on f orsu m m aryj udgm entch al l enged s ev er al e le m e n ts o f M o n to ya ’s D T P A c o u n te rc la im , i n c lu d in g d a m a g e s . Agai n, M ont oy a poi nt ed t o h e raff i dav i t , i n whi ch she st at ed, “ I hav e been i nj ur ed i n hav i ng t o def end t hi s s ui t , i n dam age t o m ycredi t , i n m ent al angui sh, [ and] i n aggr av at i on ofm yex i st i ng pai nf ul phy si cal l ydebi l i t at i ng condi t i ons. ” A nd agai n, M ont oya off er ed n ot hi ng i n t he wa yo ff act s t o supp ortt hese concl usoryst at em ent s. She does n otprov i de det ai l s ofanyeconom i c l oss suff er ed as a r esul toft he al l eged15

m i srepr esent at i ons, and she does notprov i de det ai l s o fhercl ai m ed pai nf ul phy si cal c o n d itio n o r o f th e d e g re e o f th e c la im e d m e n ta l a n g u is h a n d its im p a c t o n h e r d a ily li fe
. See id. ; see, e. g. , St
. Paul Sur plus Li nes Ins. C o. v. D al- Wort h Tank C o. , 974 S .W .2 d 5 1 , 5 3 (T e x . 1 9 9 8 ) ( re q u irin g th a t, to re c o v e r d a m a g e s fo r lo s s o f c re d it r eput at i on, a pl ai nt i ffm ustf i rstsh ow t hata l oan wa s act ual l ydeni ed ora hi gher in te re s t ra te w a s c h a rg e d ); Univer se Lif e Ins. C o. v. G i

les , 9 5 0 S .W .2d 4 8 , 5 4 (T e x. 199 7) ( r equ i r i ng t hat , t o r ecoverm ent al - ang ui sh dam age s, a p l ai nt i ffm usti nt rodu ce e vi d e n c e o f a h i g h d e g re e o f m e n tal p a i n a n d d i s tre s s tha t i s m o re t h a n m e re w o rry, a n xie ty, ve xa ti o n , e m b a rra s s m e n t, o r a n g e r); Br id g e sv. Cit

i b a n k ( S. D. )N. A. , N o. 02- 06- 00081- C V, 2006 W L 37514 04, at* 3 ( T ex . App. — FortW ort h D ec. 21, 2006, no p e t. ) ( m e m . o p .) (“ C o n c l u s o ry sta tem e n ts i n a ff i d a vi ts a re n o t p ro p e r su m m a ry j udg m entev i den ce i ft here ar e no f act s t o sup portt h e c o n cl usi ons. ” ) Be cause M ont oya di d not pr odu ce m or e t han a sci nt i l l a of evi den ce of dam age s, and beca use we hav e al r eadyhel d t hatsh e di d notproduce m or e t han a sc i nt i l l a ofev i dence of debtco l l ect i on v i ol at i ons, we hol d t hatt he t ri a l co urtdi d noter rbygrant i ng a noe vid e n c e s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n M o n to ya ’s D T P A c la im
. Because we hav e c oncl u d e d thatt he t r i al co urtdi d noter rbygrant i ng B lu e b o n n e t’s n o -e v id e n c e m o tio n fo r s u m m a ryju d g m e n t o n M o n to y a ’s c o u n te rc la im s , w e o v e rr u le t h e p o rt io n o f M o n to y a ’s s ixt h is s u e p e rt a in in g to th is a rg u m e n t.6
... B lu e b o n n e t’s n o -e v id e n c e m o tio n p e rt a in e d s tr ic t ly to M o n to y a ’s

count er cl ai m , upon whi ch t he tr i a l c o u rtst at ed s he woul d t ake not hi ng butdi d not ot herwi se awar d any att or ney ’ s f ees or ex pense s t o Bl uebonnet
. W e cannot det er m i ne f rom t he or derw het hert he t r i al courti nt ended t o award partoft he $1, 650 in a tto rn e y ’s fe e s a n d th e $ 2 9 6 in c o u rtc o s ts a t tria l a n d th e $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 in a tto rn e y ’s fe e s o n a p p e a l fo r th e n o -e vid e n c e s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. 16 D . Att or ney ’ s Fees I n herse v ent h i ss ue, M ont oy a rai ses se v eral co m pl ai nt s c oncer ni ng t he t r i al court ’ s a war d ofatt or ney ’ s f ees t o Bl uebonnet
. Mostoft hese com pl ai nt s wer e not ra ise d i n th e tri a l c o u rt a n d , t h e re fo re , a re n o t p re s e rve d fo r a p p e ll a te re vie w . See T e x. R . A p p . P . 3 3 .1 (a ); B us h e ll, 8 0 3 S .W .2d a t 7 1 2
. H o w e ve r, b e c a u s e w e h a ve h e l d t h a t B l u e b o n n e t w a s n o t e n ti tl e d t o p re va i l o n i ts t ra d i ti o n a l m o ti o n f o r su m m a ry ju d g m e n t, it w a s a ls o n o t e n title d to th e $ 1 ,6 5 0 in a tto rn e y ’s f e e s a n d th e $ 2 9 6 in courtcost s aw ar ded byt he t r i al courtf orpr evai l i ng o n t hatcl ai m . An d be cause M o n to y a is p a rt ia lly s u c c e s s fu l o n a p p e a l, w e m u s t re v e rs e th e ju d g m e n t’s uncon di t i onal award of $10, 000 f or att or ney ’ s f ees i n t he ev ent of an appeal oft he sum m aryj udgm entf or$10, 058. 07. See A r e n av. Arena , 822 S. W
. 2d 645, 651 6 ( T ex . App. — FortW ort h 19 9 1 , no wr i t ) ( hol di ng t hatwhen a decree awardi ng a tto rn e y ’s fe e s d o e s n o t c o n ta in la n g u a g e c o n d itio n in g th e a w a rd u p o n s u c h p a rty ’s s u c c e s s i n p re va i l i n g o n a p p e a l , the e rror i s n o n re ve rsib l e o n l y i f tha t p a rty is c o mp le te ly

su cc ess f ul on a ppeal , and t hat“ [ a] t r i al co urtm aynotpenal i ze a partyf or tak i n g a s u c c e s s ful a p p e a l b y taxing h i m w i th att o rn e y’ s fee s i f h e ta k e s it. ”). Because M ont oy a does notchal l enge t he port i on oft he t r i al co urt ’ s o rderawardi ng17

sum m aryj udgm entt o Bl uebonnet on i t s cross cl ai m , we aff i r m t he am ount s a war ded i n t hatport i on oft he j udgm ent . W e sust ai n M ont oy a’ s s ev ent h i ss ue as i tpert ai ns to a tto rn e y’ s f e e s a n d d a m a g e s f o r B l u e b o n n e t’ s t ra d i ti o n a l m o ti o n f o r su m m a ry j udgm ent , and we ov er r ul e t he rem ai nderofM ont oy a’ s s ev ent h i ss ue. I V. Concl usi on Hav i ng s us t ai ne d i n pa rtM on t oy a’ s t hi rd, f ou rt h, si xt h, and s ev en t h i s s ue s , we re ve rse the p o rt i o n o f the tr i a l c o u rt ’ s j u d g m e n t g ra n ti n g tra d i ti o n a l su m m a ry ju d g m e n t to B lu e b o n n e t a n d a w a rd in g $ 1 0 ,0 5 8 .0 7 in d a m a g e s ; $ 1 ,6 5 0 in a tto rn e y ’s f ees and $29 6 i n c ourtco st s a tt r i al ; and $10, 000 i n att or ney ’ s f ees i n t he ev entof a p p e a l
. H a vi n g o ve rrule d t h e rem a i n d e r of M o n toya ’ s d i s p o s i ti ve iss u e s , w e a ff i rm t he t r i al co urt ’ s j udgm entgrant i ng no- ev i dence s u m m a ryj udgm entt o Bl uebonnet a n d g r a n tin g s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t o n B lu e b o n n e t’ s c ro s s c la im a n d th e a m o u n ts a w a rd e d i n s u p p o rt o f t h e c ro s s c la im s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t.

B OB M CC OY J U S T I C E P A N E L: D A U P H I N O T , W A LK E R , and M C C O Y, JJ. D ELI VE R ED : O ct ober28, 2010