Court Opinion

ID: 9763491
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 02:47:03.451654+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:44.410581
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Cherie Cotner has filed a motion for rehearing asking us to “clarify the matter of the amount of post-judgment interest which she is entitled to receive.” Cherie argues that post-judgment interest should accrue from February 13, 1991, the date of the initial judgment against the State. However, when the Supreme Court reversed this court’s opinion in the first appeal, it remanded the ease to the trial court for further proceedings, with instructions that the trial court was “free to render a final judgment or to grant all parties a new trial, and to take other actions not inconsistent with this opinion.” 1 On remand, the trial court entered an amended judgment, signed on August 30, 1993, awarding Cherie $250,000, “with interest thereon at the maximum lawful rate from the date of this Judgment until paid.”
Although Cherie’s brief concludes with a prayer that “the judgment of the trial court dated February 13, 1991, will again be affirmed,” that is not the judgment from which the State perfected this second appeal. In addition to awarding damages to Cherie, the amended judgment ordered that Stephen recover nothing on his claims against the State and denied the State’s counterclaim for contribution against Stephen. With regard to the amended judgment, the record does not reflect that Cherie objected to the judgment’s award of interest from “the date of this Judgment.”2 Furthermore, because Cherie did not raise this complaint by cross-point in her brief on original submission, we *68decline to address it now on motion for rehearing.3
We deny Cherie Cotner’s motion for rehearing.

. See State Dep't of Highways and Public Transp. v. Cotner, 845 S.W.2d 818, 819 (Tex.1993).

. See Tex.R.App.P. 52(a).

. See Tex.R.App.P. 74(e); cf. University of Tex. Medical Branch v. York, 808 S.W.2d 106, 112 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1991) (sustaining cross-point on post-judgment interest), rev'd on other grounds, 871 S.W.2d 175 (Tex.1994).