Court Opinion

ID: 9831201
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:54:40.214998+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:32.461754
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
On motion for rehearing the appellant insists that the judgment of the trial court should not only be reversed but also rendered.
It would be our duty to render the judgment were it not for the fact that the trial court overruled the defendant’s special exception assailing the plaintiffs’ petition for an alleged insufficiency in not stating or alleging that the defendant had notice of facts that the plaintiff, (appellee) was interested in the delivery of the message in suit. This action of the trial court evidently misled the plaintiff in matter of pleading and developing her cause of action, and it becomes this court’s duty to reverse and remand the same. We do so upon the authority of Smith v. Patton (Tex. Com. App.) 241 S. W. 109, and the numerous authorities therein cited; International Bridge & Tramway Co. v. MeLane, 8 Tex. Civ. App. 665, 28 S. W. 454; Allen et al. v. Clopton (Tex. Civ. App.) 135 S. W. 242.
The record does not show the error to have been harmless.
The motion is overruled.