Lane v. Hart

I respectfully dissent. I do agree that the law is well settled in this state that clerical errors in the entry of a judgment may be corrected by a nunc pro tunc judg*422ment but judicial errors may not be so corrected. Comet Aluminum Company v. Dibrell, supra; Finlay v. Jones, 435 S.W.2d 136 (Tex.1968). Statement of the rule is simple, application of the rule presents difficulties.

In its application, as stated in Reavley and Orr, Trial Court’s Power to Amend its Judgments, 25 Baylor Law Review 191,196 (1973):

(T)he critical inquiry is not what judgment might or ought to have been rendered, but…