Motion for Entry of Judgment in Texas

What Is a Motion for Entry of Judgment?

Background

“Generally after verdict a party can obtain judgment by filing a motion for judgment or by tendering a proposed judgment to the court.” (Morse v. Delgado (1998) 975 S.W.2d 378, 381 citing Tex. R. Civ. P. 301, 305.)

“If a party files a motion for judgment on the verdict and does not indicate in some manner that it disagrees with the substance of the verdict, then that party cannot challenge on appeal the judgment it requested.” (First Nat'l Bank v. Fojtik,775 S.W.2d 632, 633 (Tex. 1989); Litton Indus. Prod., Inc. v. Gammage (1984) 668 S.W.2d 319, 321-22.) This rule is nothing more than a species of the invited error doctrine which prohibits a party from complaining on appeal about an error which he invited. (Morse, supra, citing Texas Indus., Inc. v. Vaughan (1996) 919 S.W.2d 798, 804.)

How to Structure the Motion

To preserve a complaint for appellate review, a party must have presented to the trial court a timely request, objection, or motion that states the specific grounds for the desired ruling, if they are not apparent from the context of the request, objection, or motion. (Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a).)

“To preserve a point of error in a judgment, a party must inform the trial court of its objection by a motion to amend or correct the judgment, a motion for new trial, or some other similar method.” (Homes v. Humphrey (2008) 244 S.W.3d 570, 582; Dal-Chrome Co. v. Brenntag Sw., Inc. (2006) 183 S.W.3d 133, 144; see also Holland v. Hayden (1995) 901 S.W.2d 763, 765 [motion for new trial is appropriate method for preserving error regarding alleged defect in final judgment.]) Judgment error regarding questions of law must be raised in the trial court. (Solomon v. Steitler (2010) 312 S.W.3d 46, 61.)

Statement to Include in Motion

“To preserve the right to complain about a judgment on appeal, a movant for judgment should state in its motion to enter judgment that it agrees only with the form of the judgment, and note its disagreement with the content and result of the judgment.” (First Nat. Bank of Beeville v. Fojtik (1989) 775 S.W.2d 632, 633.)

Indeed, the actual articulation necessary under Fojtik is:

While Plaintiffs disagree with the findings of the jury and feel there is a fatal defect which will support a new trial, in the event the Court is not inclined to grant a new trial prior to the entry of judgment, Plaintiffs pray the Court enter the following judgment. Plaintiffs agree only as to the form of the judgment but disagree and should not be construed as concurring with the content and result.

(Id.)

A party who moves for judgment on the verdict and does not reserve the right to complain may not take a position on appeal inconsistent with that part of the judgment. (Litton Indus. Prods., Inc. v. Gammage (1984) 668 S.W.2d 319, 321-22 (Tex. 1984); see Fojtik, 775 S.W.2d at 633.)

Consent from Opposing Counsel

When counsel submits a proposed judgment to the court, he generally obtains consent from opposing counsel indicating that the opposing party approves the proposed judgment as to form or as to form and substance. This practice allows the court to enter judgment without conducting a hearing to determine whether the opposing party has any objections to the proposed judgment. It facilitates the prompt entry of judgment and the initiation of the appellate process. (See, Morse v. Delgado (1998) 975 S.W.2d 378, 381 citing Fojtik, 775 S.W.2d at 633.)

The Court’s Decision

In deciding whether a movant's position against a verdict is allowed in a motion for judgment, it is well established that “[a] motion for judgment on the verdict is an affirmation by the movant that the findings of the jury are supported by competent evidence.” (Braswell v. Braswell (1972) 476 S.W.2d 444, 446.) Thus, by filing a motion that the trial court render judgment on the verdict, a party is not then permitted to take a position inconsistent with the judgment on appeal. (Litton Indus. Prods., Inc., supra, 668 S.W.2d at 322.)

In clarifying the effects of a motion for entry of judgment, it has been repeatedly held that “[w]hen a litigant moves the trial court to enter judgment, and the trial court enters the proposed judgment, the motion for entry of judgment will generally be considered an acquiescence in the verdict, which will foreclose a subsequent attack on appeal. (Texas Commerce Bank v. Lebco Constructors (1993) 865 S.W.2d 68, 80; see laso, Casu v. Marathon Refining Co.(1995) 896 S.W.2d 388, 389.) Further, “[w]hen a party moves for entry of judgment for a particular amount, and the trial court renders judgment for that amount, that party cannot challenge the judgment on appeal.” (Casu, 896 S.W.2d at 389; see Litton Indus. Prods., Inc. v. Gammage (1984) 668 S.W.2d 319, 321-22.)

Documents for Motion for Entry of Judgment in Texas

Sort By

BRANDON RAY et al vs. JOSEPH SCOTT HOUGHTON APRN-CRN et al document preview

1 9 1 NOTICE OF INTENT TO DISMISS - Final Disposition Hearing

2 pages

THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY 191st DISTRICT COURT 214-653-6609 April 10, 2024 VENKATESWARA RAO MANDAVA, MD 6632 CORINA COURT COLUMBIA MD 21044 Re: DC-21-17253 BRANDON RAY et al vs. JOSEPH SCOTT HOUGHTON …

Case Name BRANDON RAY et al vs. JOSEPH SCOTT HOUGHTON APRN-CRN et al