Stephens v. Henry S. Miller Co.

Decision Date16 January 1984
Docket NumberNo. 05-83-01084-CV,05-83-01084-CV
Citation667 S.W.2d 250
PartiesWalter H. STEPHENS, Appellant, v. HENRY S. MILLER COMPANY, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Harry J. Martin, Jr., Bill C. Hunter, Hunter, Vineyard, Drake & Miller, Dallas, for appellant.

Joe B. Harrison, E. Stratton Horres, Jr., Gardere & Wynne, Dallas, for appellee.

Before GUITTARD, C.J., and STEWART and SHUMPERT, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellee Henry S. Miller Company has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for failure to file a bond within the time prescribed by rule 356 of Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Appellant Stephens, the plaintiff below, was awarded liquidated damages, interest and attorney fees. The judgment by implication denied appellant's request for specific performance and his claims based on fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence. After signing the judgment, the judge struck through his signature and the date, but later signed the same judgment again and gave it another date. Appellee argues that the time for appeal runs from the date of the first signing even though the judge attempted to vacate the judgment as first signed. We agree with appellee and grant the motion to dismiss.

The findings of fact filed by the trial court include the following:

63. The Final Judgment was signed on June 10, 1983. A Judgment which was identical to the Final Judgment, except for the date, was signed on March 22, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the "March Judgment").

64. At the time the "March Judgment" was signed, the following notation was made on the Court's docket sheet:

March 22, 1983 Judgment

65. Before thirty days had elapsed following the signing of the "March Judgment," the date and signature on the "March Judgment" were scratched through. The Court's intent in making these changes was to void the "March Judgment." 2

66. No Motion for New Trial, and no Motion to Modify, Correct, Vacate or Set Aside the "March Judgment" was filed before the expiration of thirty days from and after the signing of the "March Judgment."

67. No appeal or cost bond was filed before the expiration of thirty days from and after the date of the signing of the "March Judgment."

68. The only post-Judgment motion filed by Stephens was filed on July 7, 1983, which date was within thirty days after the execution of the Final Judgment.

Appellant's attorney has filed an affidavit with this court as authorized by rule 406 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. The affidavit indicates that the reason the trial judge struck the signature and the date from the judgment was that a question was raised as to whether both counsel had approved the form of the judgment and the judge wished to give appellant an opportunity to present objections.

The trial court's intent as reflected in the findings of fact is relevant to whether a judgment was rendered in March. The mere act of signing a judgment does not constitute a rendition of judgment. The signing is a ministerial act by which an enduring evidence of the judicial act is afforded. Coleman v. Zapp, 105 Tex. 491, 151 S.W. 1040, 1041 (1912). Rendition is the official oral or written announcement of the court's decision which is to be distinguished from the writing which is required to evidence it. Knox v. Long, 152 Tex. 291, 257 S.W.2d 289, 292 (1953). Rule 306a provides that the date a judgment is signed as shown of record determines the beginning of the periods prescribed by the rules for filing various documents in connection with an appeal but does not determine what constitutes rendition of a judgment or order for any other purpose. It is clear that in March the judge rendered judgment and signed the draft presented to him. Appellant contends that the court had plenary power to vacate, modify, correct or reform the judgment. We hold that,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Scoville v. SpringPark Homeowner's Ass'n, Inc.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 11 Enero 1990
    ... ... Smith, Neal P. and Evelyn L. Watts, Elton and Elisa Powers, Bruce R. and Sylvia K. Miller, Thomas C. and Deborah J. Connors, Kathleen V. Johnson, Paul R. and Tanya K. Engle, John M. and ... ...
  • Dean's Campin' Co. v. Hardsteen, No. 13-05-468-CV (Tex. App. 8/29/2008)
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 29 Agosto 2008
    ...that the signing of a second judgment, reaffirming an earlier judgment, cannot extend appellant's time table, citing Stephens v. Henry S. Miller Co., 667 S.W.2d 250, 252 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1984, writ dism'd by agr.) (trial court may not enlarge the time for perfecting an appeal by making an ......
  • Agbor v. St. Luke's Episcopal Hosp.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 30 Noviembre 1995
    ...entry of the January 26, 1994, summary judgment did not extend the time for the Agbors to perfect an appeal. See Stephens v. Henry S. Miller Co., 667 S.W.2d 250, 252 (Tex.App.--Dallas 1984, writ dism'd by agr.). Thus, St. Luke's contends the Agbors' appeal bond was not timely filed. We The ......
  • Ex parte Conoly, 05-87-00077-CV
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 1 Mayo 1987
    ...a judgment to writing is merely a ministerial act by which an enduring evidence of the judicial act is afforded. Stephens v. Henry S. Miller Co., 667 S.W.2d 250, 252 (Tex.App.--Dallas 1984, writ dism'd by agreement); see also Gholson v. Thorn, 597 S.W.2d 568, 571 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1980,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT