First Alief Bank v. White
| Decision Date | 12 December 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. C-3546,C-3546 |
| Citation | 682 S.W.2d 251 |
| Parties | FIRST ALIEF BANK, Relator, v. The Hon. Frank O. WHITE, Judge, Respondent. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Russell C. Jones, Bellaire, for relator.
Morris, Tinsley & Snowden, Ronald G. Mitchell, Rokki Ford Roberts, Houston, for respondent.
This original mandamus proceeding attacks the action of the trial court in (1) allowing a third party to intervene after judgment and (2) modifying its judgment after the expiration of the court's plenary jurisdiction. We conditionally grant the writ.
Relator, First Alief Bank, filed the underlying action to collect two promissory notes naming as defendants, Krone Construction Company and Gary and Terry Krone. The bank also filed an application for pre-judgment attachment on two tracts of land owned by the Krones. The trial court signed an order for the issuance of a writ of attachment on the two tracts. The bank thereafter filed notice of lis pendens.
The defendants appeared and answered the bank's petition but took no further action. The bank obtained a summary judgment and judgment nunc pro tunc which awarded recovery on the notes and ordered the attachment liens on the two tracts foreclosed. The defendants neither filed a motion for new trial nor perfected an appeal. The judgment became final on June 2, 1984.
While the suit was pending, the Krones sold the home on one of the tracts attached by the bank to the Hoovers. This sale was completed after the issuance of the writ of attachment and the filing of the lis pendens notice. After this sale but prior to the entry of judgment, the attorney representing the bank informed the Hoovers of the bank's action against the Krones. After judgment the attorney notified the Hoovers that the property purchased from the Krones would be sold to satisfy the bank's prior lien.
In order to block the sale of their property, the Hoovers sought to intervene in the original action on July 26, 1984, eighty-four days after Judge White had signed the judgment. The bank moved to dismiss the plea in intervention asserting that the trial court had lost jurisdiction over the cause. A hearing was held at which Judge White overruled the bank's motion to dismiss and considered the Hoovers' arguments that their rights to the property were superior to those of the bank. On August 7, 1984, Judge White signed an order setting aside the portion of his previous judgment foreclosing the attachment lien.
In the present mandamus, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Terrazas v. Ramirez
...proceedings in Mena were permissible. Furthermore, no one had the right to intervene after the entry of judgment. First Alief Bank v. White, 682 S.W.2d 251, 252 (Tex.1984) (no right to intervention after judgment unless court sets judgment aside, even if trial court retains plenary jurisdic......
-
State v. Naylor (In re State)
...law dictates that a party may not intervene post-judgment unless the trial court first sets aside the judgment. See First Alief Bank v. White, 682 S.W.2d 251, 252 (Tex.1984) (“[A] plea in intervention comes too late if filed after judgment and may not be considered unless and until the judg......
-
San Patricio County v. Nueces County
...of McAllen, Inc., 167 S.W.3d 827, 830 (Tex.2005); Board of Trustees v. Toungate, 958 S.W.2d 365, 367 (Tex. 1997); First Alief Bank v. White, 682 S.W.2d 251, 252 (Tex.1984) (orig.proceeding) (per 4. To support its cause of action, San Patricio cites Staats v. Miller, 150 Tex. 581, 243 S.W.2d......
-
Serna v. Webster
...of pleading apply to intervenor). Moreover, an intervention must be timely filed; in any case, before the judgment. First Alief Bank v. White, 682 S.W.2d 251, 252 (Tex.1984). Appellants' notice meets this requirement as well. We conclude that the written notice of lien filed in the case gav......