1 ... S ee T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 0 7 - 1 8 9 - CV
T ONN A B R OOK S AP P E L L ANT V . BA N K O F NEW YO RK TRU ST A PPELL EE COMP ANY , N. A. AS S UC CE S S OR T O J P M O R G A N C H A S E B A N K , A S TR U STEE

----- ----- -- FR O M CO UN TY CO URT AT LAW NO . 1 OF TARRA NT CO UN TY

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

### M E M ORANDUM OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I. I N T R OD U C T I ON A ppel l antTo nna B r ooks seeks a r est r i ct ed appeal fr o m a n agr eed j udg m entgr an tin g A p pel l ee Ban k ofN ew Y or k Tr ustC om pany ( Ban k ofN ew Yor k) pos se ss i on ofTonna ’ s hom e p r em i se s and t he r i ghtt o obt ai n a w r i tof2

posses s io n . I n herf i r stt w o i ssues, To nna con t ends t hatbecause ofher
a b s e n c e a t th e h e a ri n g , th e a g re e d j u d g m e n t i s i n te rl o c u to ry a n d c a n n o t s u p p o rt t he i ssuance ofa w r i t of possessi on. I n hert hi r d i ssue, To nna con t ends t hat t he agr eed j udg m enti s nota def aul t j udg m entbecause no evi dence w as of f er ed
or r ec ei v e d b yt h e t r i a l c o u r t . B e c a u s e t h e t r i a l c o u r tr e n d e r e d j u d g ment
w it h o u tT o n n a ’s p a r t ic ip a t io n a n d c o n s e n t , w e re v e r s e t h e j u d g m e n ta s v o id
a n d re m a n d t h e c a s e f o ra n e w t r ia l.

II . F ACT UALAND P RO CEDU RA L B ACKGROUND Ban k of N e w Y or k f i l ed i t s or i gi nal pet i t i on f orf or ci bl e det ai neragai nst Tonna and “ al l ot heroc cup ant s” on F ebr uary 2 7 , 2 0 07, i n t he j us t i ce oft he peace cour t . O n M ar ch 9 , 20 07 , t he j ust i ce oft he peace cour tr ender ed j udg m enti n f avorofBan k ofN ew Y or k. O n t hatsam e day, To nna per f ect ed her and herhusband , G or don ’ s, appeal by f i l i ng an app eal bond w i t h t he j ust i ce oft he peace court . O n M ar ch 2 8, 2 0 0 7 , T o n n a and G or don f i l ed a “W r i t t en S t at em ent ” w i t h t he coun t y c o u rt , st at i ng t hatt hey w er e appeal i ng t he case because t hey w er e notgi ven pr opernot i ce of th e fo r ecl osur e and t hatt hey

w er e s ee ki ng c ouns el . Bank o f N e w Yor k f i l ed an am end ed pet i t i on, an d t he
c ou nt y c ou r ts e tt r i a l f orApr i l 25, 2007 . O n t he dat e o ft r i al , Bank of N ew Yor k app ea r ed t hr ough i t s at t or neyan d G or don appear ed i n per son. N ot hi ng i n th e r ecor d show s t hatTo nna ever2 ... T h e i n i t i a l n o t i c e o fa p p e a l f i l e d o n J u n e 4 , 2 0 0 7 , s t a t e d t h a t“ T ONN A

BROO KS a nd ALLOC CU PANTS” de s i r e d t o a pp e a l t he c a se . O n Aug us t , 8, 2007, To nn a a m e nd e d t he no t i c e of a pp e a l a nd t oo ko ut“ ALLOC CU PANTS” to refl e c t t h a t sh e w a s th e o n l yp e rso n ap p e a l i n g the ag ree d j u d g m e n t. 3 app ea r ed bef or e t he cou nt y cou r t on A pr i l 25, 200 7. Bef or e t r i al be gan , Bank ofN ew Y or k’ s at t or ney t ol d th e c o unty courtt hat“w e j ustcam e t o an a g re e m e n t.” A c c o rd i n g l y , th e c o u n tyc o u rt, G o rd o n , a n d B a n k o f N e w Y o rk si gned an agr eed j udg m ent , w hi ch gave Ban k of N ew Y or k t he r i ght t o possess t he pr em i se s a t i s s u e and t he r i ghtt o obt ai n a w r i tofpos se ss i on i ft he
o c c u p a n ts fail e d to v a c a te b y M a y 1 1 , 2 0 0 7 . O n M a y 2 5 , 2 0 0 7 , th e co u n ty
cour t i s s u e d t h e wr i t o f p o s s e s s i o n , wh i c h e v e n t u a l l y wa s r e t u r n e d as

“ u n s e r v e d ,” a n d T o n n a t h e n f ile d t h is re s t r ic t e d a p p e a l. 2 II I. R ESTRI CT ED A P P EAL To b e e nt i t l e d t o a r e s t r i c t e d a pp e a l , a n a pp e l l a ntm us ts ho w t ha ts he ( 1) f i l ed a noti ce of r est r i ct ed appeal w i t hi n si x m onths af t er t he t r i al cour tsi gned th e j u d g m e n t oror der ; ( 2) i s a p art y t o t he su i t ; ( 3) di d notpa r t i ci pat e i n t he h e a r in g t h a t r e s u lt e d in t h e ju d g m e n t c o m p la in e d o f ; a n d (4 ) d id n o tt im e lyf ile any po stj udg m entm ot i on, r equestf or f i ndi ngs of f act and con cl usi ons ofl aw , o r a n o ti c e o f a p p e a l w i th i n th e ti m e p e rm i tte d b yru l e 2 6 .1 (a ). T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 6 .1 (a ), (c), 3 0 ; A vi ati on Composite Te chs . , In c . v . CLB C or p. , 131 S. W . 3d 1 8 1 , 1 8 4 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 4 , n o p e t.). T h e s e re q u i re m e n ts a re4

j ur i sdi ct i onal and w i l l cutof fa par t y’ s r i ght t o seek r el i ef by w ay ofa r est r i ct ed
a p p e a l i f th e ya re n o t m e t. Id. O nce an appel l antest abl i shes t hatshe has m et t hes e r equ i r em ent s, s he m us tt hen es t abl i sh er r orap par entf r om t he f ac e o ft he
re c o rd b e fo re s h e w i l l b e e n ti tl e d to re l i e f fro m th e a d v e rs e j u d g m e n t. Id . To nna i s a part y t o t he sui ta n d p rop er l y f i l ed hernot i ce ofr est r i ct ed appeal w i t hi n si x m o n th s f r om t he dat e t he t r i al cour tsi gned t he agr eed j udgm ent . Tonna al so di d notf i l e a pos tj udgm entm ot i on, r equ es tf orf i ndi ngs off actand concl usi ons of l aw , or a noti ce ofappeal w i t hi n t he t i m e per m i t t ed by r ul e 26. 1( a) . BankofN ew Yor k, how eve r , as se r t s th a t w e d o n otha ve j u ris d ic ti on ov ert hi s r est r i ct ed appeal because To nna par t i ci pat ed i n t he t r i al t hatr esul t ed i n t he agr eed j udg m ent . Thu s, our anal ysi s i s l i m i t ed t o w het her Tonna part i ci pat ed i n t he t r i al t hat r es ul t ed i n t he agr ee d j udgm ent and , i fs he di d not , w het hert her e i s er r orap par enton t he f ac e o ft he r ec or d. A . Part i ci pat i on I n d e term i n i n g w h e th e r t h e n o n p a rt i c i p a ti o n req u i rem e n t of rule 3 0 i s m e t, t he que st i on i s w het hert he app el l antpa r t i c i p a te d i n t he “d ec i si on- m ak i ng e v e n t” th a t re s u l te d i n th e o rd e r a d j u d i c a ti n g th e a p p e l l a n t’s ri g h ts . Id . a t185. The e xt entofpa r t i ci pat i on i n t he ac t ual t r i al oft he ca se w hi ch w oul d pr ec l ude a par t y f r om obt ai nin g appel l at e r evi ew by w r i tofer r or , now know n as
r est ric te d a p p e al , i s one ofdegr ee. Tram co Enter s. , I nc. v. I ndep. A m . Sav.5

A s s ’n , 7 3 9 S .W .2 d 9 4 4 , 9 4 6 (T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 1 9 8 7 , n o w ri t) ( i nt er pr et i ng f or m erTexa s R u l e ofA ppe l l at e Pr oce dur e 45, gov er ni ng w r i tof
e rro rs ). Th e deci si on- m aki ng even ti n t hi s case i s t he si gni ng of t he agr eed j udgm entby t he cou nt y c ourt , G or don, and Bank of N ew Yor k o n t he dat e o f tr i al . Bank of New Y or k ci t es Clopton v. Pakf ort he pr opo si t i on t hatan a p p e lla n tc a n s t ill p a r t ic ip a t e in t h e d e c is io n -m a k in g e v e n te v e n t h o u g h s h e d id
n o t p h y s i c a l l ya tte n d th e h e a ri n g th a t re s u l te d i n th e a d v e rs e j u d g m e n t. S ee 66 S. W . 3d 513, 516 ( Tex. A pp. — Fort W ort h 2001, pe t . de ni ed) . I n Clopton , we hel d th a t a tt end anc e a ta di sm i ss al he ar i ng w as unne ce ss ar y w hen t he at t or ney s f ort he app el l ant s and app el l ee s agr ee d on, s i gne d, an d f i l ed a j oi nt
m o ti o n to s e v e r a n d d i s m i s s th e c a s e . Id . W e st at ed t hat“nei t herappel l ant s’
nor t hei r at t or ney ’ s at t end anc e at t he hea r i ng w as nec es sa r y on c e th e j o i nt
m ot i on w as f i l ed. ” Id . Ban k ofN ew Y or k at t em pt s t o anal ogi ze Clopton t o t he f act s oft hi s case by st at i ng t hatl i ke Cl opton , “p r i or t o a t r i al , t he part i es ag r ee d t o a j udgm ent th a t disp o se d o f al l p a rt i e s a n d i ss u e s.” B a n k o f N e w Y o rk g o e s o n fu rt h e r t o st at e t hat“[ t ] he evi dence i n t he r ecor d dem onst ra t es t hatt he j udg m entw as a g ree d to b yall the p a rt i e s p ri o r t o the ca se b e i n g ca l l e d to tri a l , a t w h i c h p o i n t, th e a tte n d e e s w e re a d d re s s e d b yth e [c ]o u rt.” U l ti m a te l y , B a n ko f N e w Y o rk6

ar gue s t hat t he l ang uag e of t he agr ee d j udgm entan d t he si gna t ur e b y Gor don, T o n n a ’s h u s b a n d a n d f e llo w o c c u p a n t , d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t T o n n a p a r t ic ip a t e d in th e d e c i sion -m a k i n g ev e n t. Eve n t hough t he f ac t s her e a r e si m i l ar , w e dec l i ne t o e xt end ourhol di ng i n Clopton t o t he f ac t s i n t hi s ca se . I m port ant t o t he dec i si on i n Clopton w as t he fa c t th a tt he app el l ant s part i ci pat ed through thei r at tor ney . S e eid . at 516 –17 . The at t or neyha d t he aut hor i t y t o a cton t hei rbe hal f , an d t he m ot i on si gne d byt hei rat t or neyw as pr oof on t he r ec or d oft he app el l ant s’ pa r t i ci pat i on. S e ei d. at517. Her e, t her e i s no e vi den ce t hatTonna ag r ee d t o a nyt hi ng t hr ough an at t or ney ; i n f ac t , t he r ec or d s how s t hatne i t herTonna norG or don
eve rr et ai ned co uns el pr i ort o f i l i ng t hi s app ea l . W e f urt hernot e t hatnot hi ng on t he r ec or d s upport s t he pr opos i t i on t hatG or don h ad t he aut hor i t y t o s i gn on b e h a l f o f T o n n a . S ee W i l ki ns on v. Stevi

so n , 514 S. W . 2d 895, 898 ( Te x. 1974 ) ( st at i ng t hatt he m ar i t al r el at i ons hi p doe s noti n i t se l fm a ke one s pous e t he
a g e n t o f th e o th e r). Bu tsee Taylor v. Gi l bertG ertner

Enter s. , 466 S. W . 2d 337, 339 ( Tex. Ci v. A pp. — H ous t on [ 1st D i st . ] 197 1, w r i tr ef ’ d n. r . e. ) ( “A hus ban d
m ay be sh ow n t o be t he age ntof hi s w i f e. Fac t s and ci r cum st anc es m i ghtbe pr oduc ed w hi ch w oul d r equ i r e a f i ndi ng t ha t th e w i fe i s bound by t he
a g re e m e n t o f h e r h u s b a n d .” ); M ercer v. McCasl

and, No . 0 1

- 9 5

- 0 1 23 2- C V, 1996 W L5320 61, a t*1–2 ( Te x. App.

— Hous t on [ 1s t Di s t . ] Se pt . 19, 1996 ,7

no w r i t ) ( not desi gnated f orpubl i cat i on) ( hol di ng t hatt he r ecor d dem onst r at ed t hatt he w i f e consented t o t he agr eed or dereven t hou gh she di d not appearat th e h e a ri n g b e c a u se the h u sb a n d “s p e c i fi c a l l y sta ted ” th a t h e h a d the au th o ri ty to a c t o n h i s w i fe ’s b e h a l f). Lik e w i s e , w e d i s a g re e w i th B a n ko f N e w Y o rk ’s
as se r t i on t hatbe ca us e t he re c or d doe s notev i den ce a “l ac k o fau t hor i t y” f or G or don t o ent eri n to t he agr eed j udg m entf orbot h hi m sel fand T onn a t hat Tonna “c ann otnow at t em pt t o den y t he val i di t y of t he agr ee d j udgm ent . ” Bank ofN ew Yor k h as not es t abl i sh ed t hat G or don had t he aut hor i t y t o e nt eri nt o t he agr ee m entf orTonna , an d s o t h e a b s enc e o fev i den ce s how i ng a “ l ac k o f
a u th o ri ty” i s i rr e l e v a n t. W e h o l d tha t ev e n tho u g h T o n n a fi l e d a w ri tten sta tem e n t i n the co u n ty
cou r t , s he di d notpa r t i ci pat e i n t he dec i si on- m ak i ng eve ntbe ca us e s he w as not p res e n t at the tr ia l a n d d i d n o t si g n the ag ree d j u d g m e n t. SeeRam i rezv. L yfo rd C o n so l. I

n dep . S ch . D is t. , 900 S . W . 2d 902, 906 ( Tex. A pp. — C or pus C hr i s t i 1 9 9 5 , n o wr i t ) ( h o l d i n g t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t , wh o f i l e d a p e t i t i on a nd par t i ci pat ed i n pr et r i al di scover y, di d not par t i ci pat e i n t he “act ual t r i al ” because he di d notpa r t i ci pat e i n t he pr oce edi ngs l ea di ng up t o t he r end i t i on oft he j u d g m e n t).8

B . E rro r A p p a re n t o n th e F a c e o f th e R e c o rd Beca us e Tonna sa t i sf i ed t he r equ i r em ent s ofr ul e 30, s he m us tnow s how
er r orap par ent on t he f ac e o ft he r ec or d. Tonna ar gue s f i r stt hati tw as er r or fo r th e c o u n tyc o u rt to i s s u e th e w ri t o f p o s s e s s i o n o n a n i n te rl o c u to ry j udg m entt hatdi d not di spose ofheras a par t y. She st at es, i n t he al t er nat i ve, t hat because t he coun t y cour tdi d not r ecei ve any evi dence att he hear i ng w hen i tent er ed t he agr eed j udg m ent t hat w e shoul d vacat e and set asi de t he agr eed j u d g m e n t. A l t hou gh T onn a does notuse t he w or d “consent , ” she r epeat edl y st at es t hats he di d nott ak e p arti n t he dec i si on m a k i n g pr oce ss l ea di ng up t o t he
a g r e e d j u d g me n t . S h e s t a t e s t h a t“ [ t ] h e r e c o r d . . . s h o ws t h a tM r s . B r o oks had no part i n t he [ a] gr ee d [j ] udgm ent . ” She a l so as se r t s t hatG or don w as not
a u th o ri ze d to “c o m m i t h e r” to a n ag ree d j u d g m e n t m e rel yb e c a u se h e l i v e d w i th h e r . W e lib e r a llyc o n s t r u e T o n n a ’s a r g u m e n ta s in c lu d in g a c la im t h a ts h e d id
n o t p a rti c i p a te i n o r c o n s e n t to th e a g re e d j u d g m e n t. S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 3 8 .1 (e ), 3 8 .9 ; Shei

kh v. Sh ei

kh , 248 S. W . 3d 381 , 392 ( Tex. A pp. — H ous t on [ 1stD i st . ] 20 07 , no pet . ) ( st at i ng t hateven t hou gh t he appel l antar gued t hat th e tr i a l co u rtl a c k e d su b j e c t- m a tter j u ri sd i c ti o n to e n ter an o rde r, “a t t h e h e a rt ” of t he i ssue w as a com pl ai nt t hat t he t r i al cour t er r ed i n dr af t i ng an over l y br oad
o rd e r).9

I n T exas, a val i d consent j udg m entcannot be r ender ed by a courtw hen
c o n s e n t o f o n e o f th e p a rti e s i s w a n ti n g . Q ui ntero v. Ji

m W alter Hom es, I

nc. , 6 5 4 S .W . 2 d 4 4 2 , 4 4 4 (T e x . 1 9 8 3 ); W i l l i a m s v. Ho l

l i ngsw o rth , 568 S. W . 2d 1 3 0 , 1 3 1 (T e x . 1 9 7 8 ); Bur nam an v. Hea ton , 240 S. W . 2d 288, 291 ( Tex. 19 51 ) . C onsent m ustexi st at t he ver y m om ent t he cour t und er t akes t o m ake th e a g re e m e n t th e j u d g m e n t o f th e c o u rt. Bur nam an , 24 0 S .W .2 d a t291. W hen con senthas ei t her been w i t hdr aw n or i s l acki ng att he t i m e t he agr eed j udgm ent i s r end er ed, t he j udgm ent i s voi d. Soh ocki v. So hocki, 897 S. W . 2d 4 2 2 , 4 2 4 (T e x . A p p .— C o rp u s C h ri s ti 1 9 9 5 , n o w ri t); see al so Samples Exter m i nators v. Samples , 6 4 0 S .W .2 d 8 7 3 , 8 7 4

– 7 5 (T e x . 1 9 8 2 ). T h e s u p re m e c o u rt h a s h e l d th a t a b s e n t a ru l e 1 1 a g re e m e n t, a c o u rt
ca nnotr end eran ag r ee d j udgm entw hen a part y t o t he su i tdi d notat t end an d

w as notr epr es ent ed att he h ea r i ng w her e t he j udgm entw as r end er ed. W illia m s , 568 S . W . 2d at 131 –32 . I n W illia m s , t h e a p p e lla n tw a s in v o lv e d in
a w i l l co nt es ti n w hi ch t he con t es t ant s so ught , am ong o t hert hi ngs , a port i on oft he r es i dua r y e st at e, t o w hi ch t he app el l antw as en t i t l ed t o one - hal fas one o f t h e d e c e d e n t’s s o n s . Id . a t 1 3 1 . O n the d a yo f t ri a l , th e w i l l co n tes tan ts and t he i ndep enden texecut or appear ed and ann oun ced t o t he t r i al cour tt hat th e yh a d s e ttled th e c o n tro v e rs y . Id . E a c h c on t e s t a ntw ou l d r e c e i ve $8, 000 fro m th e re s i d u a ry e s ta te , a n d th e w i l l w o u l d o th e rw i s e s ta n d a s p ro b a te d . Id .3 ... Thi s port i on oft he j udgm entr ea ds , “ Pl ai nt i f fap pea r ed by a nd t hr ough

i t s des i gna t ed r epr es ent at i ve orco uns el of r ec or d. D ef end ant ( s) , Tonna G or don B ro o k s a p p e a re d i n p e rs o n .” 10 Beca us e n ei t hert he app el l antnorhi s at t or ney w a s pr es entatt he t r i al , t he C ourts t at ed t hat t he app el l ant had notco ns ent ed t o t he agr ee d j udgm entan d th a t th e j u d g m e n t w a s th u s p ro p e rl ys e t a s i d e fo r l a c ko f c o n s e n t. Id . at 131–3 2. Th e agr ee d j udg m enti n t hi s case gr ant s possess i on of t he pr em i ses at i ss ue t o Bank of N ew Yor k. I tal so or der s t hati f“ def end ant s f ai l t o va ca t e b y M ay 11, 2007 , t hen [ B a n k o fN ew Yor k] s hal l be en t i t l ed t o obt ai n a w r i tof p o s s e s s io n o r d e r in g a n yC o n s t a b le t o re m o v e d e f e n d a n t s . . . .” T h u s , lik e in W illia m s , t he j udgm ent at t em pt s t o adj udi ca t e Tonna’ s r i ght s eve n t hough s he d i d n o t pa rt i c i p a te i n o r ag ree to th e j u d g m e n t. To nna di d not si gn t he a g re e d j udg m ent , and i n f act , hernam e w as cr ossed outoft he int r odu ct or y par agr aph of t he j udg m ent ; i n i t s pl ace, s o m e o n e h a n d w ro te “ G o rd o n .” BankofN ew Yor k c ont end s t hat“ t he 3 j u d g m e n t w a s a g re e d to b ya l l th e p a rti e s ,” b u t th e re i s n o th i n g i n th e re c o rd t o s ugge stt hatTonn a ev erag r ee d t o t he j udgm ent . The t r ans cr i ptoft he t r i al

— i n i t s ent i r et y— i s as f ol l ow s: TH E CO U RT: BankofN ew Yor k v er su s Br ook s. W hat ’ s up?11

[B A N K ]: M o rning , Y o u r H o n o r, w e j u st c a m e to a n ag ree m e n t. TH E CO U RT: O ka y. TH E C O U R T: Y ou’ r e M r . Br ooks? M R . BR O O K S : I ’ m M r . Br ooks. TH E C O U R T: Y ou l i ve t her e w i t h T onn a, yourw i f e? M R . B R O O K S : Y e s , sir. A s s h o w n b yth e tra n s c ri p t, n e i th e r p a rtyd i s c u s s e d w i th th e tri a l c o u rt th e i s s u e o f T o n n a ’s c o n s e n t to th e j u d g m e n t. M o re o v e r, B a n ko f N e w Y o rk ’s at t or ney st at ed t hat“w e j ustca m e t o a n a gr ee m ent , ” i n d i c a ti ng t hatt he
a g r e e m e n tw a s b e t w e e n o n lyt h o s e p a r t ie s p r e s e n ta tt h e t r ia l. [ E m p h a s is
a d d e d .] B e c a u s e n o th i n g o n th e re c o rd s u g g e s ts th a t T o n n a a p p e a re d b e fo re t he cou r t , w e c onc l ude t hatt he agr ee m ent w as bet w ee n Bank of N ew Yor k a nd G o rd o n . S e eWi

l l i a ms , 5 6 8 S .W .2 d a t1 3 1

– 3 2 . A c c o r d in g ly , w e s u s t a in T o n n a ’s fi rs t i s s u e to th e e x te n t th a t w e c o n s tru e i t a s a rg u i n g th a t th e c o u rt i m pr oper l y r ender ed j udg m entabsent her par t i ci pat i on and consent. Becau se t he cou nt y c ourts i gne d t he agr ee d j udgm entab se ntTonna ’ s con se nt , t he j u d g m e n t i s v o i d . S e eS o h o c ki , 8 9 7 S .W .2 d a t 4 2 4 ; s e ea l s o W i l l i am s , 568 S. W . 2d at132 ( hol di ng t hatbe ca us e t he cou r tr end er ed a j udgm entab se ntt he
con se ntofone oft he part i es , t he j udgm entw as pr ope r l y s etas i de ); C o o kv. C ook , 2 4 3 S .W . 3 d 8 0 0 , 8 0 1 , 8 0 3 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 7 , n o p e t.)4 ... Becau se w e have hel d t hat t he j udg m ent i s voi d, w e need not addr ess

Tonna’ s argu m entr ega r di ng t he i ss uan ce oft he w r i tofpos se ss i on ort he a rgu m e n t co n c e rning d e fau l t j u d g m e n t. 12 (h o ld in g t h a tt h e t r ia l c o u rt ’s ju d g m e n to n a n “ a g r e e d d iv o r c e d e c r e e ” w a s v o id

w h e n o n e p a rtyw i th d re w h i s c o n s e n t to th e a g re e m e n t b e fo re th e tri a l c o u rt g ra n te d th e d i v o rc e a n d re n d e re d j u d g m e n t). IV . C ON C L U S I ON H avi ng su st ai ned Tonna ’ s f i r sti ss ue as co ns t r ued ab ove , w e r eve r se an d
r em and t he cause t o t he t r i al court fo rf ur t herpr oceedi ngs. See C ook , 243 4 S .W .3 d a t 8 0 3 ; S oho cki, 8 9 7 S .W .2 d a t 4 2 4 .

P E R CU R I AM PA N EL B: HO LM A N , D A U PH I N O T, an d W A LKER, JJ. DEL I VERE D: J ul y 3, 2008