Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2004

Phillips v. Ivy

Phillips v. Ivy
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided September 29, 2004 · Gray
148 S.W.3d 209; 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 8801; 2004 WL 2211584 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

Phillips v. Ivy

Opinion of the Court

Case Number: 10-02-00266-CV 05/17/2005 Notice sent to Court of Appeals 05/17/2005 Case stored in record room 05/13/2005 Motion for Rehearing - Disposed Denied with Justice not sitting. 02/15/2005 Case forwarded to Court 02/09/2005 Motion for Rehearing - Filed 01/21/2005 Petition for Review disposed proceeding denied 01/21/2005 Petition for Review disposed proceeding denied 12/07/2004 Case forwarded to Court 12/07/2004 Case forwarded to Court 12/03/2004 Response to Petition for Review filed 11/17/2004 Petition for Review filed 11/17/2004 Appendix to any instrument 11/17/2004 2ND Petition for Review filed 11/17/2004 Appendix to any instrument 11/17/2004 Notice requesting filing fee Motion for rehearing denied.

Dissenting Opinion

Phillips has filed a motion for rehearing asking us to reconsider our affirmance of the trial court's refusal to award prejudgment interest. First, I would request a response in order to have the benefit of full briefing on the issue. Based upon the issue as presented, however, I am inclined to agree that we have erred in relying upon the authority of two Fort Worth cases, one of which was reversed. See Citizens Nat'l Bank v. Allen RaeInvs., Inc., 142 S.W.3d 459, 486-488 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth, 2004, no pet. h.); Miga v. Jensen, 25 S.W.3d 370, 381 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2000), aff'd in part on other grounds rev'd in part,96 S.W.3d 207, 217 (Tex. 2002).

Accordingly, I respectfully dissent to the Court's denial of the motion for rehearing.

Opinion of the Court

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice,

dissenting

on motion for rehearing.

Phillips has filed a motion for rehearing asking us to reconsider our affirmance of the trial court’s refusal to award prejudgment interest. First, I would request a response in order to have the benefit of full briefing on the issue. Based upon the issue as presented, however, I am inclined to agree that we have erred in relying upon the authority of two Fort Worth cases, one of which was reversed. See Citizens Nat’l Bank v. Allen Rae Invs., Inc., 142 S.W.3d 459, 486-488 (Tex.App.Fort Worth, 2004, no pet. h.); Miga v. Jensen, 25 S.W.3d 370, 381 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2000), aff'd in part on other grounds & rev’d in part, 96 S.W.3d 207, 217 (Tex. 2002).

Accordingly, I respectfully dissent to the Court’s denial of the motion for rehearing.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.