Court Opinion

ID: 9833912
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:08:27.168421+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:09.038042
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[13] The authorities cited by appellee in support of its insistence that any error in the.verdict and judgment rendered thereon was waived by the appellants when they did not object to the receipt of the verdict all relate to verdicts that were defective in form. If we are correct in the conclusion that the liability of the defendants in this case is several and not joint, then the verdict and judgment based thereon, imposing a joint liability, is erroneous in the same way that a verdict and judgment for an excessive amount would be; and we have never heard of its being contended that, in order to complain of a verdict and judgment for being excessive, it is necessary to.object to the receipt of the verdict. In addition to this, the verdict was not responsive to the issues, and under the statute it was the duty of the court to have called the jury’s attention thereto, and sent them back for further deliberation. R. S. art. 1981. Having failed to dp this, no judgment can be rendered on their verdict. Darden v. Taylor, 60 Tex. Civ. App. 73, 126 S. W. 944.
The motion for rehearing will be overruled.