Legal Opinion

Gilbert v. Brownell Electro

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 29, 1992No. 12-89-00305-CVPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BILL BASS, Justice.

This is an appeal from a denial of a motion to set aside or vacate a default judgment and to grant a new trial. Gilbert failed to answer in the underlying lawsuit and now claims that he was entitled to a new trial under the test set out in Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, 134 Tex. 388, 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939). We find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Gilbert’s equitable motion for new trial. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Appellee Brownell Electro, plaintiffs in the trial court, sued Gilbert, doing business as Tyler Armature…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Strackbein v. PrewittTexas Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Bank One, Texas, N.A. v. MoodyTexas Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Jackson v. Mares, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1991
  5. Gotcher v. BarnettCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Christopher Utz, Utz Environmental Services v. McKenzie, Duffy, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2013
  2. Inez Manigault v. Jane Thorn-Henderson, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2015
  3. Jerry W. Thomas v. Bobby D. Associates, an Ohio General Partnership, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2002

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

Powered by the Exa API