DSC Finance Corp. v. Moffitt

815 S.W.2d 551, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 825, 1991 Tex. LEXIS 106, 1991 WL 182367
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 18, 1991
DocketD-0124
StatusPublished
Cited by124 cases

This text of 815 S.W.2d 551 (DSC Finance Corp. v. Moffitt) 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
DSC Finance Corp. v. Moffitt, 815 S.W.2d 551, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 825, 1991 Tex. LEXIS 106, 1991 WL 182367 (Tex. 1991).

Opinion

On Application foe WRIT of ERROR to THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE Fifth DistRict of Texas

PER CURIAM.

The order of this court of April 17, 1991, granting the application for writ of error is withdrawn, as the application was improvidently granted.

DSC Finance Corporation obtained a post-answer default judgment against Lawrence Moffitt for breach of a guaranty agreement. Moffitt challenged the judgment by writ of error to the court of appeals. 797 S.W.2d 661.

We recently stated the four elements of a writ of error appeal:

A direct attack on a judgment by writ of error must: (1) be brought within six months after the judgment was signed, Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 51.013 (Vernon 1986); Tex.R.App.P. 45; (2) by a party to the suit, Tex.R.App.P. 45; (3) who did not participate in the actual trial, id.; (4) and the error complained of must be “apparent from the face of the record.” Brown v. McLennan County Children’s Protective Servs., 627 S.W.2d 390, 392 (Tex.1982).

General Electric Co. v. Falcon Ridge Apartments, 811 S.W.2d 942, 943 (Tex.1991). Some intermediate appellate courts have interpreted the last requirement as limiting review to error shown by reference solely to the transcript, or to fundamental error. See, e.g., Gourmet, Inc. v. Hurley, 552 S.W.2d 509, 512-13 (Tex.Civ.App.—Dallas 1977, no writ).

Our opinion in Brown did not alter the scope of review by writ of error. In determining whether Moffitt had met the requirement that error appear on the face of the record, the court of appeals correctly concluded that it “may consider all of the papers on file in the appeal including the statement of facts.”

The application for writ of error is denied.

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

Related

Tatianna Turner v. Nicole Johnson
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte: Thomas Eugene Rumbaugh
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2021
Ex Parte Tammy Butler
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2019
Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P. v. Virginia Armijo
570 S.W.3d 377 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2019)
Randal B. Ward v. Suzanne Banowsky McCaskill
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2018
Human Biostar, Inc. v. Celltex Therapeutics Corp.
514 S.W.3d 844 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2017)
Levent Ulusal v. Lentz Engineering, L C
491 S.W.3d 910 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2016)
Ex Parte Richard Pinnock
437 S.W.3d 564 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2014)
in the Interest of K.M., a Child
401 S.W.3d 864 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)
Juan Ayala v. Blanca Edit Ayala
387 S.W.3d 721 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2011)
Woods v. Schoenhofen
302 S.W.3d 576 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009)
Norma Woods v. Robert M. Schotenhofen
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009
Miles v. Peacock
229 S.W.3d 384 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007)
Victor Miles v. Bridget Peacock
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007
Cordero v. American Home Assurance Co.
281 S.W.3d 13 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Stanley C. Thorne v. Sharon D. Thorne
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Alaa Eldin Sobol v. Patricia Leanne Sobol
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
815 S.W.2d 551, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 825, 1991 Tex. LEXIS 106, 1991 WL 182367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dsc-finance-corp-v-moffitt-tex-1991.