Department of Human Resources v. Wininger

Texas Supreme Court

Department of Human Resources v. Wininger

657 S.W.2d 783, 27 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 29, 1983 Tex. LEXIS 375

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 5, 1983

DocketC-2333

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 657 S.W.2d 783 (Department of Human Resources v. Wininger) 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

Department of Human Resources v. Wininger, 657 S.W.2d 783, 27 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 29, 1983 Tex. LEXIS 375 (Tex. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Department of Human Resources brought this suit to enjoin Delores Wining-er from operating a child care facility in her home. The trial court found that Wininger had not complied with the various minimum standards for registered family homes in violation of Chapter 42 of the Texas Human Resources Code and granted a permanent injunction. Tex.Hum.Res.Code Ann. Chap. 42 (1980 & Supp.1982). The court of appeals dissolved the injunction based on the Department’s failure to have properly pleaded its cause of action. 653 S.W.2d 376. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand this cause to that court.

The Department’s pleadings alleged that Wininger had failed to comply with licensing requirements promulgated for the operation of child care facilities. This pleading was in error, for the proper allegation should have been based on Wininger’s failure to have met the registration requirements of the Code. The unchallenged findings of fact and admissions at trial show the trial court judgment was based on Win-inger’s refusal to comply with the Code registration requirements. Although no *784 pleading error was raised in the trial court or the court of appeals, this impropriety was the basis for the court of appeals’ reversal of this cause. The court did not reach the two points addressed by Wining-er, both of which challenged the constitutionality of the statute in question.

By reversing on this unassigned error, the court of appeals erroneously elevated a pleading defect to the status of fundamental error. American General Fire and Casualty Co. v. Weinberg, 639 S.W.2d 688 (Tex.1982). This holding is contrary to Tex.R. Civ.P. 90 and this Court’s holding in Weinberg. Therefore, the application for writ of error is granted and, without hearing oral arguments, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and this cause is remanded to the court of appeals for disposition of points of error properly presented thereto. Tex.R.Civ.P. 451, 483.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Department of Human Resources brought this suit to enjoin Delores Wining-er from operating a child care facility in her home. The trial court found that Wininger had not complied with the various minimum standards for registered family homes in violation of Chapter 42 of the Texas Human Resources Code and granted a permanent injunction. Tex.Hum.Res.Code Ann. Chap. 42 (1980 & Supp.1982). The court of appeals dissolved the injunction based on the Department’s failure to have properly pleaded its cause of action. 653 S.W.2d 376. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand this cause to that court.

The Department’s pleadings alleged that Wininger had failed to comply with licensing requirements promulgated for the operation of child care facilities. This pleading was in error, for the proper allegation should have been based on Wininger’s failure to have met the registration requirements of the Code. The unchallenged findings of fact and admissions at trial show the trial court judgment was based on Win-inger’s refusal to comply with the Code registration requirements. Although no *784 pleading error was raised in the trial court or the court of appeals, this impropriety was the basis for the court of appeals’ reversal of this cause. The court did not reach the two points addressed by Wining-er, both of which challenged the constitutionality of the statute in question.

By reversing on this unassigned error, the court of appeals erroneously elevated a pleading defect to the status of fundamental error. American General Fire and Casualty Co. v. Weinberg, 639 S.W.2d 688 (Tex.1982). This holding is contrary to Tex.R. Civ.P. 90 and this Court’s holding in Weinberg. Therefore, the application for writ of error is granted and, without hearing oral arguments, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and this cause is remanded to the court of appeals for disposition of points of error properly presented thereto. Tex.R.Civ.P. 451, 483.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

657 S.W.2d 783, 27 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 29, 1983 Tex. LEXIS 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-human-resources-v-wininger-tex-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack