Americana Motel, Inc. v. Johnson

610 S.W.2d 143, 24 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 99, 1980 Tex. LEXIS 401
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 3, 1980
DocketB-9755
StatusPublished
Cited by86 cases

This text of 610 S.W.2d 143 (Americana Motel, Inc. v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Americana Motel, Inc. v. Johnson, 610 S.W.2d 143, 24 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 99, 1980 Tex. LEXIS 401 (Tex. 1980).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only point before us is whether an issue of fact has been raised so as to preclude summary judgment. The evidence before the trial judge at the summary judgment hearing consisted of the sworn pleadings of each party, an affidavit by the manager of the Americana Motel in support of its motion, and the Motel’s answers to interrogatories and request for admissions. The court of civil appeals reversed the summary judgment for the Motel, and remanded for trial. 604 S.W.2d 293.

Sworn pleadings are not summary judgment evidence in Texas, Hidalgo v. Surety Savings and Loan Association, 462 S.W.2d 540, 545 (Tex.1971); nor are denials to a request for admissions. Oliver v. Allstate Insurance Company, 456 S.W.2d 558, 560 (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1970, writ dism’d w.o.j.); Sandone v. Dallas Osteopathic Hospital, 331 S.W.2d 476, 479 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo 1959, writ ref’d n.r.e.). The Motel manager’s affidavit contains a clear, positive, direct, and credible denial of any dealings with Johnson, and is free from any contradictions and inconsistencies elsewhere in the record. There being no other evidence before the trial court, summary judgment was correctly entered for the Motel.

We regard the holding of the court of civil appeals to be in conflict with Hidal-go, supra, and with Great American Reserve Insurance Company v. San Antonio Plumbing Supply Company, 391 S.W.2d 41, 47 (Tex.1965), which holds that uncontro-verted testimony by an interested party may support a summary judgment if it is “clear, direct and positive and there are no circumstances in evidence tending to discredit or impeach such testimony.” Accordingly, the writ of error is granted, and pursuant to Rule 483 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, we reverse the judgment *144 of the court of civil appeals without hearing argument, and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund v. Primexx Energy Corporation
2025 Tex. Bus. 9 (Texas Business Court, 2025)
the City of Austin v. Brandy Credeur
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2021
Hiren Jain v. Plainscapital Bank
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2017
Stanwyn J. Carter v. Tammie J. Perry
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Kien M. Nguyen v. Citibank N.A.
403 S.W.3d 927 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)
Cedyco Corp. v. Whitehead
253 S.W.3d 877 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Wheeler v. Security State Bank, N.A.
159 S.W.3d 754 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
TWENTY-NINE (29) GAMBLING DEVICES v. State
110 S.W.3d 146 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Twenty-Nine Gambling Devices v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Ford v. City State Bank of Palacios
44 S.W.3d 121 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
Gerstacker v. Blum Consulting Engineers, Inc.
884 S.W.2d 845 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Southwestern Gas Pipeline, Inc. v. Scaling
870 S.W.2d 180 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Maewal v. Adventist Health Systems/Sunbelt, Inc.
868 S.W.2d 886 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
610 S.W.2d 143, 24 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 99, 1980 Tex. LEXIS 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/americana-motel-inc-v-johnson-tex-1980.