Zepeda v. Giraud

HARDBERGER, Justice.

Robert Zepeda seeks review by writ of error of a default judgment rendered against him and in favor of Eugene and Margery Giraud. In one counterpoint of error, Appel-lees allege that this court lacks jurisdiction to hear Zepeda’s appeal by writ of error because he has already pursued an ordinary appeal from the same default judgment.

The trial court rendered the default judgment on December 14, 1992. Zepeda timely perfected an ordinary appeal from the default judgment by filing an appeal bond on January 13, 1993. This court dismissed Zepeda’s appeal because he failed to…