Butler v. Holt Machinery Co.

739 S.W.2d 958, 1987 Tex. App. LEXIS 9023

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Butler v. Holt Machinery Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 1987 Tex. App. LEXIS 8968 →

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided November 25, 1987·No. No. 4-86-00295-CV·Published

Opinion

ON APPELLANT’S AND APPELLEE’S MOTIONS FOR REHEARING

REEVES, Justice.

Appellant (Butler) and Appellee (Holt) have each filed a motion for rehearing. The motions are overruled except as to the computation of damages. Butler brings to our attention that the judgment entered by this Court fails to include $7,500.00 award[959]*959ed by the trial court to Butler as attorney fees for the successful dissolving of a writ of sequestration. Holt brings to our attention that the judgment of this Court does not credit the $50,000.00 awarded Butler by the trial court for the successful recovery of his usury claim to the judgment. Both contentions have merit.

Therefore, the original opinion of this Court is hereby corrected. Holt shall have judgment against Butler for $39,997.51.

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

ON APPELLANT’S AND APPELLEE’S MOTIONS FOR REHEARING

REEVES, Justice.

Therefore, the original opinion of this Court is hereby corrected. Holt shall have judgment against Butler for $39,997.51.

Butler v. Holt Machinery Co., 739 S.W.2d 958, 1987 Tex. App. LEXIS 9023 (Tex. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

739 S.W.2d 958 (Butler v. Holt Machinery Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.