Court Opinion

ID: 9830046
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:50:30.840935+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:11.665499
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Appellees’ motion for rehearing is overruled. Under and in compliance with Article 2227, R.C.S., appellees filed the following remittitur: “Now comes the plaintiff, Hulde E. Blair, by her attorneys of record, and offers to remit all of the damage awarded to her under Special Issue No. 17-A, same being in the amount of Seventeen Hundred Fifty ($1750.00) Dollars. Plaintiff also offers to remit the sum of One Hundred Twenty Eight and 25/100 ($128.00) Dollars, being the amount plead as costs of funeral expenses and as an item of damage under Special Issue No. 17, and asks that this amount' be taken from the amount awarded to her under Special Issue No. 17. These offers to remit under Special Issue No. 17-A are made without admitting error in submitting Special Issue No. 17 or Special Issue No. 17-A.” Under Article 2227 the trial court had no discretion to accept, reject, or modify the íemittitur. The filing of the remittitur invoked section 3 of Article 2227: “Execution shall issue for the balance only of such judgment.”
We grant appellants’ motion for rehearing as agkinst our order affirming the judgment for the amount of $1,750, and on that issue we grant appellants’ prayer “that the judgment heretofore rendered in this cause be set aside, and that this cause be reversed in its entirety and remanded for a new trial.”