Legal Opinion · Dissent

Thermex Energy Corp. v. Rantec Corp.

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided March 7, 1989No. 05-88-01339-CVPublished

1DissentBaker, Justice

I respectfully dissent.

In this case, the majority acknowledges that compliance with rule 306a is jurisdictional, cites the authority that says it is, and then proceeds to ignore it completely in its result-oriented opinion.

In Butts v. Capitol City Nursing Home, Inc., 705 S.W.2d 696 (Tex.1986) (per curiam), Butts filed a motion to reinstate that did not comply with rule 165a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure because it was not verified. The supreme court noted that because Butts’ motion was unverified, there was “no proper motion filed with the [trial] court within thirty (30) days of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Butts v. Capitol City Nursing Home, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Memorial Hospital of Galveston County v. GillisTexas Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Sifuentes v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1988
  4. Malik v. Hidden Valley Civic ClubCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API