Summary
reversing post-answer default judgment for lack of reporter's record on appeal
Summary of this case from In re K.B.AOpinion
No. 01-01-01110-CV.
February 13, 2003.
Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 740229.
Panel consists of Justices HEDGES, JENNINGS, and ALCALA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a post-answer default judgment case. We reverse and remand.
Background
Defendants/appellants, Best Buy RV, Inc. and Jerry Evans, filed a general denial, but failed to appear for trial. After a bench trial, the trial court rendered a post-answer default judgment and awarded $183,849.99 to plaintiffs/appellees, James and Martha Galloway. This Court received an affidavit from the official court reporter, stating that there is no reporter's record of the trial.
Defendants contend that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the award of damages, the court's finding against defendants on their affirmative defense of limitations, and the capacity of defendant Evans to be held personally liable. Defendants request this Court to reverse and remand for a new trial, arguing that they are entitled to a new trial because the court reporter did not furnish a reporter's record.
Post-Answer Default JudgmentThe default judgment in this case was a post-answer default judgment, as opposed to a no-answer default judgment. See Stoner v. Thompson, 578 S.W.2d 679, 682 (Tex. 1979). Unlike a no-answer default judgment, in a post-answer default judgment, it cannot be said that the non-answering party has admitted the facts pled and the justice of the opponent's claim. Id. "A post-answer `default' constitutes neither an abandonment of defendant's answer nor an implied confession of any issues thus joined by the defendant's answer. Judgment cannot be entered on the pleadings, but the plaintiff in such a case must offer evidence and prove his case as in a judgment upon a trial." Id.
This Court addressed the issue in the post-answer default judgment case of Carstar Collision v. Mercury Finance, 23 S.W.3d 368 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. denied). In Carstar, the court reporter, although present at the hearing, was not requested to record any testimony, and therefore, no record was made. Id. at 369-70. We held that, "[i]f the judgment is rendered after presentation of evidence to the court in the absence of the appellant and his attorney, the failure to have the court reporter present to make a record constitutes reversible error." Id. at 370. Further, "[s]uch error is not harmless because, without a reporter's record, this Court is unable to determine if sufficient evidence was submitted to support the judgment." Id.
Based on Carstar, we hold that this case must be reversed and remanded for a new trial because there was no reporter's record of the post-answer default judgment.
Conclusion
We reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause for a new trial.