Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Ronnie Lee NATHO, Sr., Appellant v. Rosie May SHELTON, Appellee.
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
On September 8, 2011, the district court entered judgment against appellant, awarding appellee $87,296.00 in actual damages, $20,000 in exemplary damages, and $35,000 in attorney's fees. On May 30, 2014, we issued a memorandum opinion reversing and rendering judgment that appellee is not entitled to attorney's fees or a constructive trust on Natho's homestead and holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the full amount of actual damages awarded. We therefore suggested a remittitur in the amount of $54,199.89 and informed the parties that if appellee timely filed a remittitur in that amount with the district court, we would reform the portion of the trial court's judgment awarding actual damages and accordingly affirm that portion of the judgment, as reformed, and affirm the judgment in all other respects except those on which we reversed and rendered judgment.
Appellee has informed this Court that it has filed a remittitur of $54,199.89 with the clerk of the district court. Accordingly, we (1) reverse the district court's judgment awarding appellee attorney's fees and a constructive trust on Natho's homestead and render that appellee take nothing on those claims; (2) reform the actual damages portion of the judgment of the district court to award appellee $33,096.11 in actual damages instead of the original $87,296.00 awarded and, as so reformed, affirm its judgment on that claim; and (3) affirm the district court's judgment in all other respects.
DAVID PURYEAR, Justice.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 03–11–00661–CV.
Decided: July 02, 2014
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas,Austin.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)