Legal Opinion

Milam v. Miller

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)

Decided July 28, 1994No. 07-93-0161-CVPublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DODSON, Justice.

The issue presented by this appeal is whether an answer mailed at a post office prior to the answer deadline is timely filed under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 5 even though received by the clerk’s office after the deadline. 1 Plaintiffs Eddie Miller and Carl Galub (collectively referred to as Miller) sued David Milam, an individual doing business as Ostrich of Texas (Milam), for actual contractual and consequential damages. The trial court rendered a no answer default judgment against Milam for $100,000. We reverse and remand. 2

Miller filed his original petition on March 12,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Davis v. JefferiesTexas Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Ward v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Danesh v. Houston Health Clubs, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1993
  5. American Motorists Insurance Co. v. Simecek, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1983

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Warner v. GlassTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Haddix v. American Zurich Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2008
  3. Morales v. Employers Casualty Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1995
  4. $429.30 in United States Currency v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1995
  5. Jones v. Khorsandi, Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)2004

22 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