Romack v. Champions Bank
| Decision Date | 13 November 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 17774,17774 |
| Citation | 610 S.W.2d 184 |
| Parties | Ronald R. ROMACK, Appellant, v. CHAMPIONS BANK, Appellee. (1st Dist.) |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
James Boanerges, Houston, for appellant.
John F. Schaffer, Houston, for appellee.
Before COLEMAN, C. J., and WALLACE and DOYLE, JJ.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered in a suit based upon a promissory note. The principal point asserted by the appellant is that the trial court lacked jurisdiction of the case because it had been dismissed for want of prosecution and had not been properly reinstated on the day of the trial on the merits. The judgment will be reversed.
Champions Bank, appellee, brought this suit in County Court at Law No. Two of Harris County, Texas, in May of 1976, against Robert Moore and Ronald Romack for the balance due on a promissory note together with interest and reasonable attorneys fees. Robert D. Moore failed to answer and an interlocutory default judgment was rendered against him.
Ronald R. Romack filed his answer and on March 22, 1979, the case was ordered preferentially set for June 18, 1979, by Judge Hugo Touchy. On June 14, 1979, Judge Touchy granted a motion for continuance. On June 18, 1979, Judge Touchy signed an order dismissing the case for want of prosecution because neither the plaintiff nor the defendant nor their attorneys appeared at the specially set trial on that date. On September 17, 1979, Judge Touchy signed an order reinstating the cause on the ground that the order dismissing the cause was entered in error. The case was called for a trial on the merits and the judgment was signed on March 6, 1980, by Judge Edward J. Landry. Appellant asserts in his brief that he first discovered that the order of dismissal had been rendered after he had ordered the transcript for this appeal. He asserts that the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter the judgment of March 6, 1980, because the case had been dismissed for want of prosecution on June 18, 1979, and was not thereafter reinstated in accordance with Rule 165a, Tex.R.Civ.P.
Romack contends that no motion to set aside the dismissal was ever filed, and that there was no hearing of which the parties had notice prior to the entry of the order reinstating the case on the court's docket.
Appellee, Bank, points out that this appeal was taken without a statement of facts. The Bank asserts that neither the lack of notice to Romack of the hearing on reinstatement, nor the lack of a hearing can be determined from the record before this court.
The order entered by Judge Touchy does not recite that the order was entered after a hearing, nor does it recite appearances by the parties or their...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Massey v. Davis
...discovered when the transcript was prepared in connection with this appeal. Defendant cites Romack v. Champions Bank, 610 S.W.2d 184 (Tex.Civ.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.), for the proposition that in order to reinstate the case more than 30 days after the order of dism......