Bartz, Christopher v. Randall, Rita, 396 S.W.3d 647

Randall filed a revival action under §31.006 on June 18, 2010 for a dormant 1989 default judgment.
Bartz contends revival was untimely because no writ of execution was properly issued within ten years under §34.001.
Randall submitted two affidavits from attorney Lindauer claiming a writ was issued Aug 6, 1999 and delivered to the constable for service.
Writ was delivered Aug 10, 1999; Lindauer testified she paid fees and instructed pursuit of the writ.
Trial court granted Randall’s March 23, 2011 summary judgment reviving the judgment; Bartz appeals.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Are Lindauer’s affidavits proper summary judgment evidence?	Bartz argues affidavits are improper as interested, conclusory, or inadequately detailed.	Randall contends affidavits are admissible and uncontroverted; form objections were waived.	Affidavits adequate; form objections waived; credibility not a issue.
Was the revival action timely under §31.006 with a writ issued within ten years of judgment?	Randall asserts a writ issued within ten years extended revival period to 2011.	Bartz claims no proper issuance within ten years; revival untimely.	Revival timely; writ issued within ten years extended life of judgment.

Brown v. Brown, 145 S.W.3d 745 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004) (conclusory affidavits insufficient without underlying facts)
S & I Mgmt., Inc. v. Sungju Choi, 331 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011) (form objections to affidavits may be raised on appeal)
Belger v. Sweeny, 836 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. App.—Houston [Pt Dist.] 1992) (uncontroverted testimony of an interested witness may support SJ)
Dulong v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 261 S.W.3d 890 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008) (form objections to affidavits require trial-level objection)
Ross v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp., 507 S.W.2d 806 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1974) (burden to show writ issued within time; presumption of officer's duty)