Court Opinion

ID: 9858542
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:27:20.090248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:54:44.285569
License: Public Domain

*321ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING
The opinion of this court delivered on July 8, 1966 on motions for rehearing is hereby withdrawn and the following substituted therefor.
Appellee Bettes, on rehearing, contends that our judgment should have reformed the trial court’s judgment so as to affirm same in two particulars, namely, the item of $80,570 representing the cost of completion of the Virginia Projects, and the item of $119,700 representing the amount required to complete the construction of the Plattsburgh Project. Appellant New Amsterdam concedes liability for the first item of damages and we have overruled New Amsterdam’s contention with reference to the second item.
In view of the fact that New Amsterdam has admitted liability for the sum of $80,570 on the Virginia Projects we have concluded that Bettes’ point of error in its motion for rehearing relating to this item should be sustained.
As to that part of the trial court’s judgment relating to the Virginia Projects our judgment is, therefore, that the judgment of the trial court insofar as it awards the sum of $80,570 to Bettes is hereby affirmed and that part of the judgment awarding other items of damages is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
As to that part of the trial court’s judgment awarding $119,700 on the Platts-burgh Project in favor of Bettes a different situation is presented. Here New Amsterdam makes no concession but preserves its complaint to our action in affirming this item of damages. The item of $119,700 constitutes one item of an indivisible cause of action for breach on the bond relating to the Plattsburgh Project. Since the item of damages is not severable we include it in that part of the judgment which is reversed and remanded for a new trial. 4 Tex.Jur.2d, § 874, p. 459; Housing Authority of City of Dallas v. Hubbell, Tex.Civ.App., 325 S.W.2d 880; Waples-Platter Co. v. Commercial Standard Ins. Co., 156 Tex. 234, 294 S.W.2d 375; Fisher v. Coastal Transport Co., 149 Tex. 224, 230 S.W.2d 522.
Therefore, as to that portion of the judgment relating to the Plattsburgh Project the same is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
We have carefully considered both appellants’ and appellees’ second motions for rehearing and, with the exception of the modification as above stated, all points of both motions are overruled.
Appellants’ and appellees’ motions for rehearing are overruled and the judgment of the trial court is modified and affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.