Opinion · Texas Supreme Court
Howell v. Thompson
36 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 100
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Texas Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Date
- 1992-10-21
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- holding that an opinion issued after the filing of bankruptcy proceedings was void
- stating that although the appellate court’s order and judgment were void because they were entered while a bankruptcy proceeding was pending, the appellate court was not precluded from reissuing the same opinion and judgment after the automatic stay was lifted
Citator
Howell v. Thompson is good law as far as the corpus records: followed by 1 later decision, and nothing recorded condemns it.
- Authority status
- positive
- Cited by
- 47 opinions
- Followed
- 1 times
ORDER
The court of appeals’ issuance of its opinion and judgment was void because it occurred after petitioner filed bankruptcy proceedings and during the pendency of the automatic stay provided by 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1). Continental Casing Corp. v. Samedan Oil Corp., 751 S.W.2d 499, 501 (Tex.1988). It is therefore ordered that petitioner’s application for writ of error is granted, the judgment of the court of appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. Tex.R.App.P. 170. This order does not preclude reis-suance of the same opinion and judgment.