Court Opinion

ID: 9830304
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:05:22.401799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:18.567821
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We find no merit in the motion for rehearing, but conclude that the statement should be withdrawn to the effect that the objection to the consideration of assignments 3 to 8, inclusive, is meritorious. These "assignments do not complain of the failure to make additional findings of fact. They constitute attacks upon the correctness of the findings as made, and such an attack may be made without fürther predicate than an exception to the judgment of the court. Voight v. Mackle, 71 Tex. 78, 8 S. W. 623; Patten v. Herring & Kelley, 9 Tex. Civ. App. 640, 29 S. W. 388; Smith v. Abadie, 67 S. W. 1077; Brenton v. Peck, 39 Tex. Civ. App. 224, 87 S. W. 898; Thompson v. State, 23 Tex. Civ. App. 370, 56 S. W. 603; Temple v. Land Co., 81 S. W. 1188.
Motion for rehearing overruled.