defendant has a meritorious defense in Texas

2015A trial court is required to set aside such a default judgment, however, if a defendant satisfies the three-factor test established in Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124 (Tex. 1939)—namely: (1) the defendant’s failure to appear was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference, but due to a mistake or accident; (2) the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) granting a new trial will not cause delay or an injury to the plaintiff.

2008"A trial court should set aside a default judgment and grant a new trial if the defendant shows: (1) the failure to appear was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference, but was due to accident or mistake; (2) the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) granting the motion will not cause delay or injure the plaintiff." In re J.P. , 196 S.W.3d 434 , 438-39 (Tex. App.--Dallas 2006, no pet.) (citing Craddock , 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2021Unlike those cases, the record in this case contains evidence sufficient to create a fact issue over the amount 16 Evans, 889 S.W.2d at 270 . 17 Ferguson & Co. v. Roll, 776 S.W.2d 692, 698 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, no writ) (citing The Moving Co. v. Whitten, 717 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.)). 18 Ivy, 407 S.W.2d at 214 (explaining that once the defendant submits evidence that shows the defendant has a meritorious defense to the plaintiff’s claim, “it is improper to try the defensive issue” in the defendant’s motion). 14 at issue in the dispute.

2017See Estate of Pollack v. McMurrey, 858 S.W.2d 388, 392 (Tex. 1993) (quoting Ivy v. Carrell, 407 S.W.2d 212, 214 (Tex. 1966) (explaining that establishing a meritorious defense under Craddock requires not only alleging facts that constitute a defense to the cause of action asserted by plaintiff but also supporting those facts by affidavits or other evidence proving prima facie that the defendant has a meritorious defense); Holt Atherton Indus., Inc. v. Heine, 835 S.W.2d 80, 82 (Tex. 1992) (explaining that conclusory allegations are insufficient to satisfy the Craddock test).

2017See Estate of Pollack v. McMurrey, 858 S.W.2d 388, 392 (Tex. 1993) (quoting Ivy v. Carrell, 407 S.W.2d 212, 214 (Tex. 1966) (explaining that establishing a meritorious defense under Craddock requires not only alleging facts that constitute a defense to the cause of action asserted by plaintiff but also supporting those facts by affidavits or other evidence proving prima facie that the defendant has a meritorious defense); Holt Atherton Indus., Inc. v. Heine, 835 S.W.2d 80, 82 (Tex. 1992) (explaining that conclusory allegations are insufficient to satisfy the Craddock test).

2008"In applying the Craddock factors, the trial court considers 'the knowledge and acts of the defendant' as reflected in the record." Id. (citing Holt Atherton Indus. v. Heine , 835 S.W.2d 80, 82 (Tex. 1992)).

2008"A trial court should set aside a default judgment and grant a new trial if the defendant shows: (1) the failure to appear was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference, but was due to accident or mistake; (2) the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) granting the motion will not cause delay or injure the plaintiff." In re J.P. , 196 S.W.3d 434 , 438-39 (Tex. App.--Dallas 2006, no pet.) (citing Craddock , 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2007"A trial court should set aside a default judgment and grant a new trial if the defendant shows: (1) the failure to appear was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference, but was due to accident or mistake; (2) the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) granting the motion will not cause delay or injure the plaintiff." In re J.P., 196 S.W.3d 434, 438-39 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, no pet.) (citing Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2026Sutherland v. Spencer, 376 S.W.3d 752, 754 (Tex. 2012) (citing Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2017Sutherland v. Spencer, 376 S.W.3d 752, 754 (Tex. 2012) (citing Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (Tex. 1939)); Tanknology/NDE Corp. v. Bowyer, 80 S.W.3d 97, 100 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2002, pet. denied) (citing Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2021See Dolgencorp of Tex., Inc. v. Lerma, 288 S.W.3d 922, 926 (Tex. 2009); Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (Tex. 1939).

2013Ivy v. Carrell, 407 S.W.2d 212, 213 (Tex. 1966) (citing Craddock v. 6 Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 134 Tex. 388 , 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939)); see Dolgencorp of Tex., Inc. v. Lerma, 288 S.W.3d 922, 930 (Tex. 2009) (noting that, when the defendant has filed an answer, “a trial court may not render judgment on the pleadings and the plaintiff is required to offer evidence and prove all aspects of its claim” but that “the uncontested proceedings are often abbreviated and perfunctory” and that, “[i]n the absence of opposing counsel, an uncontested trial, like an uncontested damages hearing, is less li

2015Those facts must be supported by affidavits or other evidence proving, prima facie, that the defendant has a meritorious defense." Siegler v. Williams, 658 S.W.2d 236, 239 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, no writ).

1991Ivy v. Carrell, 407 S.W.2d 212, 214 (Tex.1966); Siegler v. Williams, 658 S.W.2d 236, 239 (Tex.App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, no writ).

2002Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ; see also Bank One, Texas, N.A v. Moody, 830 S.W.2d 81, 82-83 (Tex.1992); Norton v. Martinez, 935 S.W.2d 898, 901 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no writ).

2002Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ; see also Bank One, Texas, N.A. v. Moody, 830 S.W.2d 81, 82-83 (Tex.1992); Norton v. Martinez, 935 S.W.2d 898, 901 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no writ).

2002Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ; see also Bank One, Texas, N.A v. Moody, 830 S.W.2d 81, 82-83 (Tex.1992); Norton v. Martinez, 935 S.W.2d 898, 901 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no writ).

2002Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ; see also Bank One, Texas, N.A. v. Moody, 830 S.W.2d 81, 82-83 (Tex.1992); Norton v. Martinez, 935 S.W.2d 898, 901 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no writ).

2023See Matthis v. Lockwood, 166 S.W.3d 743, 744 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam).

2021Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151, 152 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam). 4 Sozanski v. Plesh, 394 S.W.3d 601, 604 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). 5 Id. 6 See Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939). 7 Strackbein v. Prewitt, 671 S.W.2d 37, 39 (Tex. 1984). 7 To establish the existence of a meritorious defense, the defendant must produce evidence that, if believed, could cause a factfinder to reach a different result in another trial. 8 Ultimately, the question is whether the evidence before the trial court shows the trial court abused its discretion in denying the de

2021Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151, 152 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam). 4 Sozanski v. Plesh, 394 S.W.3d 601, 604 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). 5 Id. 6 See Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939). 7 Strackbein v. Prewitt, 671 S.W.2d 37, 39 (Tex. 1984). 7 To establish the existence of a meritorious defense, the defendant must produce evidence that, if believed, could cause a factfinder to reach a different result in another trial. 8 Ultimately, the question is whether the evidence before the trial court shows the trial court abused its discretion in denying the de

2021Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151, 152 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam). 4 Sozanski v. Plesh, 394 S.W.3d 601, 604 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). 5 Id. 6 See Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939). 7 Strackbein v. Prewitt, 671 S.W.2d 37, 39 (Tex. 1984). 7 To establish the existence of a meritorious defense, the defendant must produce evidence that, if believed, could cause a factfinder to reach a different result in another trial. 8 Ultimately, the question is whether the evidence before the trial court shows the trial court abused its discretion in denying the de

2021Inc. v. Silver, 884 S.W.2d 151, 152 (Tex. 1994) (per curiam). 4 Sozanski v. Plesh, 394 S.W.3d 601, 604 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). 5 Id. 6 See Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc., 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (1939). 7 Strackbein v. Prewitt, 671 S.W.2d 37, 39 (Tex. 1984). 7 To establish the existence of a meritorious defense, the defendant must produce evidence that, if believed, could cause a factfinder to reach a different result in another trial. 8 Ultimately, the question is whether the evidence before the trial court shows the trial court abused its discretion in denying the de

2021Unlike those cases, the record in this case contains evidence sufficient to create a fact issue over the amount 16 Evans, 889 S.W.2d at 270 . 17 Ferguson & Co. v. Roll, 776 S.W.2d 692, 698 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, no writ) (citing The Moving Co. v. Whitten, 717 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.)). 18 Ivy, 407 S.W.2d at 214 (explaining that once the defendant submits evidence that shows the defendant has a meritorious defense to the plaintiff’s claim, “it is improper to try the defensive issue” in the defendant’s motion). 14 at issue in the dispute.

2021Unlike those cases, the record in this case contains evidence sufficient to create a fact issue over the amount 16 Evans, 889 S.W.2d at 270 . 17 Ferguson & Co. v. Roll, 776 S.W.2d 692, 698 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, no writ) (citing The Moving Co. v. Whitten, 717 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.)). 18 Ivy, 407 S.W.2d at 214 (explaining that once the defendant submits evidence that shows the defendant has a meritorious defense to the plaintiff’s claim, “it is improper to try the defensive issue” in the defendant’s motion). 14 at issue in the dispute.

2017See Estate of Pollack v. McMurrey, 858 S.W.2d 388, 392 (Tex. 1993) (quoting Ivy v. Carrell, 407 S.W.2d 212, 214 (Tex. 1966) (explaining that establishing a meritorious defense under Craddock requires not only alleging facts that constitute a defense to the cause of action asserted by plaintiff but also supporting those facts by affidavits or other evidence proving prima facie that the defendant has a meritorious defense); Holt Atherton Indus., Inc. v. Heine, 835 S.W.2d 80, 82 (Tex. 1992) (explaining that conclusory allegations are insufficient to satisfy the Craddock test).

2017Sutherland v. Spencer, 376 S.W.3d 752, 754 (Tex. 2012) (citing Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, 133 S.W.2d 124, 126 (Tex. 1939)); Tanknology/NDE Corp. v. Bowyer, 80 S.W.3d 97, 100 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2002, pet. denied) (citing Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ).

2015Milestone Operating, Inc. v. ExxonMobile Corp., 388 S.W.3d 307, 309 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam); Dodd v. Savino, 426 S.W.3d 275, 288 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, no pet.) (subs. op.).

2015Milestone Operating, Inc. v. ExxonMobile Corp., 388 S.W.3d 307, 309 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam); Dodd v. Savino, 426 S.W.3d 275, 288 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, no pet.) (subs. op.).

1991Craddock, 133 S.W.2d at 126 ; Jackson v. Mares, 802 S.W.2d 48, 49 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1990, writ denied).