From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilbert v. Huber, Hunt, Nichols, Inc.

Supreme Court of Texas
Jul 18, 1984
671 S.W.2d 869 (Tex. 1984)

Opinion

No. C-2996.

June 13, 1984. Rehearing Denied July 18, 1984.

Appeal from the 166th District Court, Bexar County, Peeples, J.

Dan M. Reed, Fort Worth, for petitioner.

House House, C.G. House, Beckmann, Krenek, Olson Quirk, William H. Quirk, III, San Antonio, for respondents.


Plaintiff filed suit for personal injuries on April 7, 1978. In response to defendants' motion for dismissal the trial court dismissed the cause on February 19, 1982, for want of prosecution. Twenty-five days later, on March 16, 1982, plaintiff filed a motion to reinstate the case. The motion was denied following a hearing on April 30, 1982. Thereafter plaintiff made a cash deposit in lieu of an appeal bond to perfect his appeal on May 17, 1982, eighty-eight days after the order of dismissal was signed. The court of appeals dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction holding plaintiff had failed to timely perfect an appeal. 672 S.W.2d 9. The court of appeals held a motion to reinstate must be filed and acted on within the thirty days prescribed by TEX.R.CIV.P. 165a to extend the time to perfect an appeal. We agree.

Prior to the enactment of Rule 165a, motions to reinstate a cause following dismissal for want of prosecution pursuant to a trial court's inherent authority were treated as motions for new trial. General Motors Corp. v. Lane, 496 S.W.2d 533, 534 (Tex. 1973). In February of 1973, Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a became effective. This rule grants a trial court authority to dismiss a cause for want of prosecution. The rule also provides a detailed scheme and timetable for the procedure regarding the reinstatement of a cause dismissed thereunder. We hold a trial court's reinstatement of a cause following dismissal for want of prosecution for whatever reason is governed by the timetable contained in Rule 165a. Danforth Memorial Hospital v. Harris, 573 S.W.2d 762, 763 (Tex. 1978). We refuse the application for writ of error, no reversible error.


Summaries of

Gilbert v. Huber, Hunt, Nichols, Inc.

Supreme Court of Texas
Jul 18, 1984
671 S.W.2d 869 (Tex. 1984)
Case details for

Gilbert v. Huber, Hunt, Nichols, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Houston A. GILBERT, Petitioner, v. HUBER, HUNT, NICHOLS, INC. et al.…

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: Jul 18, 1984

Citations

671 S.W.2d 869 (Tex. 1984)

Citing Cases

Christopher v. Fuerst

The Supreme Court has recently discussed the policy of treating motions to reinstate as motions for new trial…

Butts v. Cap City Nursing Home Inc.

The Supreme Court in General Motors, however, observed that it was not considering the effect of Rule 165a,…