Court Opinion

ID: 9827819
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:52:33.348794+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:37.271298
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant contends that we did not consider, but overlooked, his third assignment of error, though our opinion above states otherwise. This assignment complains of a lack of jurisdiction of the trial court to grant motion for a new trial following the first judgment, by reason of the strict statutory construction that should be accorded subds. 28 and 29 of Art. 2092, &.S., Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. art. 2092, subds. 28, 29. We have again fully studied this assignment, checking the chronology of the motions, original and amended, for new trial, and final order thereon.
We conclude the trial court was well within the limitations of Dallas Storage & Warehouse Co. v. Taylor, 124 Tex. 315, 77 S.W.2d 1031, as to jurisdiction. The court’s decree recites that the hearing for a new trial was carried forward to the later date by agreement, when the amended motion - of appellee was heard and granted; there being nothing before us to indicate that the trial court considered for any purpose the “trial amendment”, of which appellant complains, or that its filing constituted anything more than surplus pleading.
The matters presented in appellant’s motion for rehearing have been fully considered and are in all respects overruled.
Overruled.