Hosey v. First Nat. Bank of Goliad
| Decision Date | 28 February 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 1679,1679 |
| Citation | 595 S.W.2d 629 |
| Parties | Amos L. HOSEY, et ux., Appellants, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GOLIAD, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
This appeal is from a judgment rendered in three consolidated causes in which the First National Bank of Goliad was plaintiff and Mr. and Mrs. Amos Hosey were defendants. The judgment recites:
"Prior to conclusion of Plaintiff's evidence, the parties announced to the Court that all matters in controversy had been settled, and an agreement was dictated into the record, and was thereafter transcribed, and signed, and this Court finds that on the evidence, Plaintiff should have and is entitled to judgment pursuant to said settlement agreement."
The terms of the settlement agreement are thereafter reflected in the judgment.
Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal alleging, among other things, that appellants are estopped from attacking a judgment to which they agreed. Certified copies of the judgment and the settlement agreement are attached to the motion. All parties signed the agreement.
We note first that the judgment fully effectuates the terms of the agreement. It does not adjudicate any issues outside the scope of the agreement, and it includes all the issues which were the subject of the agreement.
It is a well settled principle of law that a party may not attack a judgment to which he has agreed, absent allegation and proof of fraud, collusion or misrepresentation. Dunman v. Hartwell, 9 Tex. 495 (1853); Griffin v. Smith, 457 S.W.2d 127 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1970, writ ref'd); DeLee v. Allied Finance Company of Dallas, 408 S.W.2d 245 (Tex.Civ.App. Dallas 1966, no writ); Alexander v. Alexander, 373 S.W.2d 800 (Tex.Civ.App. Corpus Christi 1964, no writ); Toplitsky v. Toplitsky, 282 S.W.2d 254 (Tex.Civ.App. Galveston 1955, writ ref'd n. r. e.); Pillow v. McLean, 86 S.W.2d 646 (Tex.Civ.App. Amarillo), rev'd on other grounds, 126 Tex. 349, 88 S.W.2d 702 (1935).
Appellants have not alleged that the appellee engaged in any character of fraud or coercion to obtain their agreement to the terms of the settlement. On the contrary, the record reflects that, prior to the time the agreement was signed, both Mr. and Mrs. Hosey were questioned about whether they understood and agreed to the terms of the settlement. Each replied...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gillum v. Republic Health Corp.
...or agreed absent an allegation and proof of fraud, collusion, or misrepresentation. See Hosey v. First Nat'l Bank, 595 S.W.2d 629, 630 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1980, writ dism'd), citing Dunman v. Hartwell, 9 Tex. 495 (Tex.1853). The rationale of such a rule is that a party will not be......
-
Bexar County Criminal Dist. Attorney's Office v. Mayo, S.F. MAY
...v. Jean LaFitte Corp., 652 S.W.2d 521, 525 (Tex.App.--El Paso 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Hosey v. First National Bank, 595 S.W.2d 629, 630 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1980, writ dism'd). Here the question is whether a lawyer whose signature indicates "Approved" has agreed and consented to ......
-
Ayala v. Minniti
...on a valid consideration and was not obtained by fraud, collusion, or the like. See, e.g., Hosey v. First National Bank of Goliad, 595 S.W.2d 629 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1980, writ dism'd). The rationale for this rule is that a party should not be allowed, but rather be estopped, to c......
-
M.A.W. v. Hall
...a party may not complain about a judgment to which he agreed in the absence of fraud. See, e.g., Hosey v. First Nat'l Bank, 595 S.W.2d 629 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1980, writ dism'd). Specifically, the Welsh family argues that Kawasaki Motors Corp. v. Thompson, 872 S.W.2d 221 (Tex.1994......