Court Opinion

ID: 9653931
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:59:08.668248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:03.302034
License: Public Domain

Motion for Rehearing
EVANS, Justice.
The Holmquests, on rehearing, complain of the trial court’s order striking their amended answer because the order was not signed until after the completion of trial. The transcript reflects that the order was entered prior to final judgment in the cause, and the order recites that the plaintiff’s motion to strike was heard by the court on the first day of trial. Although the statement of facts reflects discussion between court and counsel indicating that the plaintiff’s motion to strike was overruled, the order entered by the court is to the contrary and must be considered controlling. The Holmquests did not complain by point of error of the trial court’s ruling on the plaintiff’s motion to strike, and since the matter is raised for the first time in motion for rehearing, it cannot be considered by this court. Aycock v. Travis County, 225 S.W.2d 910 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1953, writ ref’d.); Advance Loan Service v. Mandik, 306 S.W.2d 754 (Tex.Civ. App.—Dallas 1957, writ ref’d. n. r. e.).