Monday, April 20, 2015

Trial Court Not Required to Specify Reasons for Denying New Trial

Originally published by Richard Smith.

Banco Popular appealed from an agreed final judgment of garnishment for over $900,000 of its account holder’s money. The same day the court signed that agreed judgment, the bank moved for a new trial on grounds that it was not indebted to the account holder after all. The trial court denied the motion for new trial, and the Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed. The Court first held that Craddock factors did not apply because it was an appeal from an agreed judgment instead of a default. The Court also shut down a pair of creative arguments, holding that trial courts are not required to explain their reasons for denying a new trial, and that they are not required to hold an evidentiary hearing before entering an agreed judgment.

Banco Popular N. Am. v. Am. Fund US Invests. LP, No. 05-14-00368-CV

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.



from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/1F7UiSD
via Abogado Aly Website

No comments:

Post a Comment