In the absence of express findings of fact and conclusions of law, a court of appeals errs by holding that “the trial court found all facts and conclusions favorable to the prevailing party rather than implying only those facts and conclusions necessary to support the judgment.” Rosemond v. Al-Lahiq, 331 S.W.3d 764, 767 (Tex. 2011) (court’s emphasis). On appellate review, the court may imply “only those findings of fact that are necessary to support the judgment,” and only those conclusions of law that are “necessary, but not made, [may be] deemed in support of the judgment.” Id. (Court’s emphasis).
FILTER BY CATEGORY
FILTER BY DATE
Please mark your calendars for our next Luncheon on May 19th when Judge Gregg Costa will give us his reflections on judging.
Congratulations also to Eboni Onuoha, a second year student at Thurgood Marshall School of Law, who received the Legal Writing Scholarship for her first year writing project.