Court Opinion

ID: 9764115
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 03:10:55.4493+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:53.705344
License: Public Domain

CADENA, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I would affirm.
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was supported by an affidavit unequivocally and categorically asserting that defendant had neither ordered nor received the goods in question from plaintiff and that defendant owed plaintiff nothing. Plaintiff filed no controverting affidavits, nor did he attempt to obtain a delay to enable him to secure controverting summary judgment evidence. Under these circumstances, the trial court correctly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Lazidis v. Goidl, 564 S.W.2d 453, 456 (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1978, no writ); Pleasant v. Johnson, 367 S.W.2d 173, 181 (Tex.Civ.App.-Beaumont 1963, writ ref’d n. r. e.).
Plaintiff’s pleadings, although verified, cannot be considered competent summary judgment evidence. Hidalgo v. Surety Savings and Loan Ass’n, 462 S.W.2d 540, 545 (Tex.1971).
Plaintiff did not question the form of defendant’s affidavit.