Maness v. Reese

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

All parties to this appeal have filed motions for rehearing and the court is divided as to some of the motions. Consequently, we will dispose of each of the motions separately.

1. The motion of appellee, Everett Reese, is overruled, all concurring.

2. The motion of appellee, Frances Maness, is overruled, Associate Justice Keith dissenting.

3. The motion of appellant, Jewel Maness, is overrruled, Associate Justice Keith dissenting.

4. The motion of appellees, Juncker and Pace, is granted and the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed for the reasons hereinafter stated. Chief Justice Dies notes his dissent.

There were no jury findings of actionable fraud against either Juncker or Pace and the trial court entered judgment in their favor that the plaintiff take nothing as to these defendants. Reese filed cross-points upon appeal, but we did not sustain any of such points. Instead, we entered a general remand as to all parties.

The authorities are unanimous that an errorless judgment may not be reversed in the interest of justice so as to permit the losing party to have another trial. City of Houston v. Blackbird, 394 S.W.2d *666159, 165 (Tex.1965); Barnum v. Lopez, 471 S.W.2d 567, 568 (Tex.1971); and Chevalier v. Lane’s, Inc., 147 Tex. 106, 213 S.W.2d 530, 535 (1948).

There is no suggestion in this record that the case was not fully developed by capable counsel representing the parties over an extended trial. Not having found error in Reese’s points, there is no valid reason to remand the case as to Juncker and Pace. Yarbrough v. Booher, 141 Tex. 420, 174 S.W.2d 47, 49, 150 A.L.R. 1369 (1943) and Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Whittenburg & Alston, 424 S.W.2d 427, 430 (Tex.1968).

The motions for rehearing filed by Juncker and Pace are in all things granted and our prior judgment as to said defendants is set aside, and the judgment of the trial court that Reese take nothing against Juncker and Pace is in all things affirmed.