Court Opinion

ID: 9684465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:58:09.634771+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:56.084211
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice.
I respectfully dissent:
The appellant’s first point of error, and the only point of error mentioning the amount of the judgment is as follows:
The Court’s error in awarding recovery against makers of the note in the amount for which note was purchased, with interest from date of purchase, rather than for the balance owing and sued for.
Finding of Fact #10 made by the trial court is as follows:
That the balance due and owing on said note by Plaintiffs at the time of the entry of the judgment is $2,306.22.
In my opinion this point of error does not raise a “no-evidence” point in reference to the finding by the trial court that the balance due and owing was the amount for *467which judgment was entered. Apparently, the appellant did not construe this point of error to be an evidentiary point, as the amount due upon the note according to the evidence is not discussed in the brief. This not being fundamental error, and the appellant’s points or error failing to raise the matter passed upon by the majority opinion, I would affirm the judgment of the trial court.