Source: http://texas-opinions.com/law-bill-of-review.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:18:49+00:00

Document:
Caldwell v. Barnes, 154 S.W.3d 93, 96 (Tex. 2004)(Caldwell II); King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.
778 S.W.2d 463, 464 (Tex. 1989); Baker v. Goldsmith, 582 S.W.2d 404, 406 (Tex. 1979).
show that he exercised due diligence to assert all adequate legal remedies before filing the bill of review.
defendant had no notice of trial setting).
established if the party proves he was not served. Id.; Caldwell I, 975 S.W.2d at 537; see Ross v.
knowledge but was not properly served has no duty to participate in the proceedings. Caldwell II, 154 S.
shown when nonreceipt is uncorroborated or was the movant’s own fault. Fidelity & Guar. Ins. Co. v.
Drewery Construction Co, Inc., 186 S.W.3d 571, 574 (Tex. 2006).
WHAT IS A BILL OF REVIEW PROCEEDING ?
bill of review for an abuse of discretion, and we indulge every presumption in favor of that ruling.
Interaction, Inc./State v. State/Interaction, Inc., 17 S.W.3d 775, 778 (Tex. App.-Austin 2000, pet. denied).
claim or defense. See King Ranch, 118 S.W.3d at 751-52.
pet.). The only exception to this limitations period is when the petitioner proves extrinsic fraud. Id.
by the respondent, collateral to the issues in the case. See King Ranch, 118 S.W.3d at 753; Bakali v.
Bakali, 830 S.W.2d 251, 255 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1992, no writ).
subject matter, no jurisdiction to enter the judgment, or no capacity to act as a court. Id.
movant. See Ross v. Nat’l Ctr. for the Emp’t of the Disabled, 197 S.W.3d 795, 797 (Tex. 2006).
not properly served have no duty to act, diligently or otherwise.” Id. at 798 (citations omitted).
technicality so easily discarded.” Id. at 797.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.