McNutt v. GARICK FIRE PROTECTION, INC.

Court of Appeals of Texas

McNutt v. GARICK FIRE PROTECTION, INC.

225 S.W.3d 657, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8423, 2006 WL 2784468

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedSeptember 28, 2006

Docket08-06-00075-CV

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 225 S.W.3d 657 (McNutt v. GARICK FIRE PROTECTION, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McNutt v. GARICK FIRE PROTECTION, INC., 225 S.W.3d 657, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8423, 2006 WL 2784468 (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Justice.

Dale W. McNutt d/b/a Club Helios appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of Garick Fire Protection, Inc. In its response to McNutts brief, Garick states the following:

Appellee has no good faith basis to argue in support of the judgment in this case. There are errors in the judgment entered by the court below. Such errors may not be rectified on appeal.

Accordingly, Appellee agrees that judgment entered in the above-captioned cause is erroneous and should be reversed and that case be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversal is proper where the appellee confesses error. Ervin v. Wichita County Family Court Services, 533 S.W.2d 947, 951 (Tex.Civ.App.-Fort Worth 1976, no *658 writ). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

BARAJAS, C.J., (Ret.)(Sitting by Assignment).

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

OPINION

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Justice.

Dale W. McNutt d/b/a Club Helios appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of Garick Fire Protection, Inc. In its response to McNutts brief, Garick states the following:

Appellee has no good faith basis to argue in support of the judgment in this case. There are errors in the judgment entered by the court below. Such errors may not be rectified on appeal.

Accordingly, Appellee agrees that judgment entered in the above-captioned cause is erroneous and should be reversed and that case be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversal is proper where the appellee confesses error. Ervin v. Wichita County Family Court Services, 533 S.W.2d 947, 951 (Tex.Civ.App.-Fort Worth 1976, no *658 writ). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

BARAJAS, C.J., (Ret.)(Sitting by Assignment).

Trinity D. Crawford, Individually and on Behalf of Precision Frac, LLC, Blue Gold Energy, LLC, Blue Gold Energy Barstow, LLC, and Karmic Energy, LLC Chad A. Carson, Individually and on Behalf of Precision Frac, LLC, Blue Gold Energy, LLC, Blue Gold Energy Barstow, LLC, and Karmic Energy, LLC and Kalee Vanmeter and Donnie Seburg v. Jarrod E. Davis A/K/A Jared E. Davis

Court of Appeals of Texas, 2019

Jason Michael Spencer v. Dextral Capital, LP, a Delaware Limited Partnership and Dextral Capital Management Fund, LP, a Delaware Limited Partnership

Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 S.W.3d 657, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8423, 2006 WL 2784468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcnutt-v-garick-fire-protection-inc-texapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack