Martinez v. Pierce

Texas Supreme Court

Martinez v. Pierce

759 S.W.2d 114, 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 359, 1988 Tex. LEXIS 35, 1988 WL 37865

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedApril 27, 1988

DocketC-7289

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 759 S.W.2d 114 (Martinez v. Pierce) 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

Martinez v. Pierce, 759 S.W.2d 114, 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 359, 1988 Tex. LEXIS 35, 1988 WL 37865 (Tex. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This personal injury action concerns the propriety of an appellate court’s retaxing of costs incurred in the trial court. Erne-terio Corona, a minor, was injured while employed by respondent Joe Pierce, d/b/a Pierce Lumber and Tie Company. The injury required an amputation to Corona’s forearm. Petitioner Adolph Martinez as next friend for Corona sued Pierce, a non-subscriber to the Texas Workers’ Compensation insurance program.

The trial court rendered judgment in favor of Corona for $24,025 and assessed all costs against Pierce. The court of appeals, in an unpublished opinion, held that Pierce was entitled to a credit and reduced the judgment of the trial court by $7,554.50. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court as reformed. The court of appeals also retaxed the costs incurred in the trial court, assessing one-half of the costs against Corona and one-half against Pierce. Taxing of costs against the successful party in the trial court is contrary to Rule 131 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

Pursuant to Rule 133(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a majority of the court grants the application for writ of error and, without hearing oral argument, we modify the judgment of the court of appeals to tax all costs in the trial court against Pierce. As so modified, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This personal injury action concerns the propriety of an appellate court’s retaxing of costs incurred in the trial court. Erne-terio Corona, a minor, was injured while employed by respondent Joe Pierce, d/b/a Pierce Lumber and Tie Company. The injury required an amputation to Corona’s forearm. Petitioner Adolph Martinez as next friend for Corona sued Pierce, a non-subscriber to the Texas Workers’ Compensation insurance program.

The trial court rendered judgment in favor of Corona for $24,025 and assessed all costs against Pierce. The court of appeals, in an unpublished opinion, held that Pierce was entitled to a credit and reduced the judgment of the trial court by $7,554.50. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court as reformed. The court of appeals also retaxed the costs incurred in the trial court, assessing one-half of the costs against Corona and one-half against Pierce. Taxing of costs against the successful party in the trial court is contrary to Rule 131 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

Pursuant to Rule 133(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a majority of the court grants the application for writ of error and, without hearing oral argument, we modify the judgment of the court of appeals to tax all costs in the trial court against Pierce. As so modified, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

759 S.W.2d 114, 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 359, 1988 Tex. LEXIS 35, 1988 WL 37865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-pierce-tex-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack