Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

539 S.W.2d 187

Cezeaux v. Libby

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 15, 1976

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1976-07-15

Relies on Ochoa v. Winerich Motor Sales Co. · Beaumont, Sour Lake & Western Railway Co. v. Schmidt · Beaumont, S. L. & W. Ry. Co. v. Schmidt

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1976-07-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 2001

5 state decisions

201976198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Non-Concurring Opinion

KEITH, Justice.

¶2Whether or not a judgment is excessive is a matter peculiarly within the jurisdiction of the Courts of Civil Appeals and is not reviewable by the Supreme Court. Beaumont, S. L. & W. Ry. Co. v. Schmidt, 123 Tex. 580, 72 S.W.2d 899, 904 (1934); Ochoa v. Winerich Motor Sales Co., 127 Tex. 542, 94 S.W.2d 416, 421 (1936). See also my concurring opinion in Collins v. Gladden, 466 S.W.2d 629, 637 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1971, writ ref’d n. r. e.).

¶3Consequently, it would be an exercise in futility to file a dissent in this cause; and, an articulation of the reasons prompting such dissent would lend nothing to the jurisprudence of this state. Thus, while I do not file a dissent to the affirmation of the judgment, neither do I concur in the affirmation of the monetary award in this cause. Although I have participated in the disposition of this cause, I dissociate myself from the result reached by the majority.

/539/sw2d/187 · .json · Public domain