Schieffer v. Patterson

433 S.W.2d 418, 12 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 55, 1968 Tex. LEXIS 352
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 16, 1968
DocketB-1089
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 433 S.W.2d 418 (Schieffer v. Patterson) 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
Schieffer v. Patterson, 433 S.W.2d 418, 12 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 55, 1968 Tex. LEXIS 352 (Tex. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner moved that a default judgment against him in this damage suit be set aside and that he be granted a new trial. The trial court overruled the motion except insofar as the motion “asks for a new trial on the issue of damages.” One month later the trial court, on petitioner’s motion, ordered the damage issue severed from the issue of liability. The Court of Civil Appeals dismissed petitioner’s appeal from the trial court’s first order overruling his motion for a new trial on all the issues because of lack of jurisdiction. 430 S.W. 2d 290. The Court of Civil Appeals reasoned that appeals lie only from final judgments and that despite the severance order the case presented only one cause of action which could result in only one final judgment.

The decision of the Court of Civil Appeals conflicts with the opinion of this Court in Pierce v. Reynolds, 160 Tex. 198, 329 S.W.2d 76, 78-79 (1959), where we held:

“No matter how erroneous its conclusion and action may have been, it was within the judicial power of the court to determine that the cause was sever-able and to sever the same accordingly. The order of severance is subject to being set aside on appeal, but until this is done it effectively separates the controversy into two causes. A judgment which fully adjudicates one of the severed causes is appealable even though the entire controversy as it existed prior to the severance is not determined thereby.”

By authority of Rule 483, Tex.Rules Civ.Proc., the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals is reversed and the cause remanded to that court for consideration on its merits.

Our holding in this case is not to be taken as approving the trial court’s order severing the issues of liability and damages. Iley v. Hughes, 158 Tex. 362, 311 S.W.2d 648, 85 A.L.R.2d 1 (1958).

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

Related

White Lion Holdings, LLC v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Sutton Levetz, Brenda Gail v. Sutton, Thomas Michael
404 S.W.3d 798 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)
Jones v. American Flood Research, Inc.
153 S.W.3d 718 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Rucker v. Bank One Texas, N.A.
36 S.W.3d 649 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
State v. Tamminga
928 S.W.2d 737 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Nicor Exploration Co. v. Florida Gas Transmission Co.
911 S.W.2d 479 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Stroud v. VBFSB Holding Corp.
901 S.W.2d 657 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Texaco, Inc. v. Shouse
877 S.W.2d 8 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Saxer v. Nash Phillips-Copus Co. Real Estate
678 S.W.2d 736 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1984)
Compugraphic Corp. v. Morgan
656 S.W.2d 530 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Gooden v. Tips
651 S.W.2d 364 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Rutherford v. Whataburger, Inc.
601 S.W.2d 441 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Nolan v. Bettis
562 S.W.2d 520 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Hall v. City of Austin
450 S.W.2d 836 (Texas Supreme Court, 1970)
City of Austin v. Hall
446 S.W.2d 330 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Schieffer v. Patterson
440 S.W.2d 124 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
433 S.W.2d 418, 12 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 55, 1968 Tex. LEXIS 352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schieffer-v-patterson-tex-1968.