Burnett v. Motyka
| Citation | 610 S.W.2d 735 |
| Decision Date | 05 November 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. B-9623,B-9623 |
| Parties | Ward BURNETT et al., Petitioners, v. Charles MOTYKA, Respondent. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
Lawrence L. Mealer, Dallas, for petitioners.
Herbert Garon, Jr., Dallas, for respondent.
In a negligence suit, Charles Motyka sought to recover property damages against Ward Burnett and Wanda Burnett, his daughter. Damages were stipulated, leaving only the liability issue for trial. In a nonjury trial, judgment was rendered against the Burnetts. The Burnetts then appealed without requesting findings of fact or conclusions of law, challenging the factual and legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court's judgment. The court of civil appeals affirmed. 599 S.W.2d 671. We reverse the judgment of the court of civil appeals and remand the cause to that court.
In a nonjury trial, where no findings of fact or conclusions of law are filed or requested, it will be implied that the trial court made all the necessary findings to support its judgment. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Jefferson Construction Co., 565 S.W.2d 916 (Tex.1978); Lassiter v. Bliss, 559 S.W.2d 353 (Tex.1978). These implied findings may be challenged by "insufficient evidence" and "no evidence" points the same as jury findings and a trial court's findings of fact. In the court of civil appeals, the Burnetts sought to challenge the trial court's implied findings on both of these grounds. In purporting to resolve these points, the court stated:
In determining whether there is any evidence to support the judgment and the implied findings of fact incident thereto, the appellate court can only consider that evidence that is favorable to the judgment and must disregard entirely that which is opposed to it.
599 S.W.2d at 673. It then proceeded by considering only that evidence favorable to the trial court's judgment. The court's opinion ended: Id. at 673.
We recognize that the above rule announced by the court of civil appeals is the correct rule to be applied to "no evidence" points. However, we have on numerous occasions held that a different rule must be applied to "insufficient evidence" points. In determining that question the court must consider and weigh all the evidence, including any evidence contrary to the trial court's judgment. In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Texas Farmers Ins. Co. v. Soriano
..."we must consider and weigh all of the evidence, including any evidence contrary to the trial court's judgment." Burnett v. Motyka, 610 S.W.2d 735, 736 (Tex.1980). We may not substitute our conclusions for that of the trier of fact, Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986), no......
-
S & A Restaurant Corp. v. Leal
...trial court made all necessary findings to support the judgment. Roberson v. Robinson, 768 S.W.2d 280, 281 (Tex.1989); Burnett v. Motyka, 610 S.W.2d 735, 736 (Tex.1980). Unless the trial court's findings are challenged by a point of error on appeal, they are binding upon the appellate court......
-
Town of Sunnyvale v. Mayhew
...factual sufficiency points, we consider all of the evidence, including any evidence contrary to the judgment. Burnett v. Motyka, 610 S.W.2d 735, 736 (Tex.1980) (per curiam). We cannot set aside a finding unless it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that it is clearly ......
-
Commonwealth Lloyd's Ins. Co. v. Thomas
...Insufficiency We consider and weigh all of the evidence, including any evidence contrary to the trial court's judgment. Burnett v. Motyka, 610 S.W.2d 735, 736 (Tex.1980). We cannot set aside a jury finding unless it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that it is clearl......