Legal Opinion

Bank One, Texas, N.A. v. Moody

Texas Supreme Court

Decided June 24, 1992No. D-0722PublishedCited by 176 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COOK, Justice.

This case presents a question of the appropriate interpretation and application of the Craddock test for granting a new trial after a default judgment. Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, 134 Tex. 388, 133 S.W.2d 124 (1939).

Robert L. Moody served a writ of garnishment on Bank One.1 After Bank One failed to file an answer, Moody obtained a default judgment for $82,000, plus $1,000 for attorney’s fees, interest and costs. Bank One then filed a motion for new trial that was overruled by operation of law. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court. 800 S.W.2d 280. We hold that…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Cliff v. HugginsTexas Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Ivy v. CarrellTexas Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Strackbein v. PrewittTexas Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Lopez v. LopezTexas Supreme Court · 1988

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by176 opinions

  1. Holt Atherton Industries, Inc. v. HeineTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Walker v. GutierrezTexas Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Director, State Employees Workers' Compensation Division v. EvansTexas Supreme Court · 1994
  4. In Re United Services Automobile Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Smith v. Babcock & Wilcox Construction Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1996

171 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API