Metro Solutions Texas, LLC and Brian Radican v. Craig Smith
02-20-00176-CV
| Tex. App. | Dec 2, 2021Background
- Smith contracted with Metro Solutions Texas, LLC to add a room; he sued Metro Solutions and its president, Brian Radican, for defective work and related claims (including DTPA).
- Metro Solutions was served Oct. 24, 2019; it did not answer, and the trial court signed a default final judgment against it on Dec. 6, 2019 stating it "disposed of all parties and all claims, [and] is final and appealable."
- Radican was served Nov. 25, 2019; he did not answer, and the trial court signed a default judgment against him on Jan. 9, 2020.
- Metro Solutions and Radican timely filed a restricted appeal within six months of both judgments, asserting among other things that the Jan. 9 judgment is void because the court had lost plenary jurisdiction after the Dec. 6 final judgment.
- The Dec. 6 judgment awarded Smith $8,213.23 in actual damages under the DTPA, plus additional consequential/additional DTPA damages and attorney’s fees; the appellate court addressed sufficiency of damages, whether additional DTPA damages were properly trebled (versus quadrupled), and whether attorney’s fees were properly awarded/segregated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Smith) | Defendant's Argument (Metro / Radican) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of Jan. 9 default judgment against Radican (jurisdiction) | The Jan. 9 judgment is valid because it disposes of Radican’s claims | The Dec. 6 judgment was final and exhausted court’s plenary power 30 days later, so Jan. 9 judgment is void | Jan. 9, 2020 judgment against Radican is void for lack of jurisdiction; vacated |
| Sufficiency of actual DTPA damages against Metro | Smith pleaded and proved specific repair, housing, storage, cleaning, termite, and billing costs totaling ~$8,213 | Metro contends the measure/proof of damages was legally insufficient | Damages award is supported: plaintiff pleaded and proved the listed items; actual damages affirmed |
| Additional DTPA damages (treble vs. quadruple) | Smith recovered actual damages plus statutory additional damages awarded by trial court | Metro argues DTPA authorizes treble damages, not quadruple (court erroneously awarded actual + treble = quadruple) | Judgment modified: DTPA award limited to treble damages (total $24,639.69), eliminating double-counting |
| Attorney’s fees award and segregation | Smith sought fees across claims and presented an affidavit of fees | Metro argues fees not segregated between fee‑eligible claims (DTPA) and non‑fee claims (negligence) | Award of attorney’s fees reversed and remanded for new trial because affidavit failed to segregate; remand required |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Elizondo, 544 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. 2018) (language declaring a judgment final and disposing of all claims can render a judgment final)
- In re Daredia, 317 S.W.3d 247 (Tex. 2010) (trial court loses plenary jurisdiction 30 days after entry of a final judgment)
- Bella Palma, LLC v. Young, 601 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. 2020) (clear statement of finality must be given effect even if record suggests otherwise)
- Ex parte E.H., 602 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. 2020) (elements and scope of restricted appeals)
- Alaimo v. U.S. Bank Tr. Nat'l Ass'n, 551 S.W.3d 212 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2017) (judgment entered after plenary power expired is void)
- Dal-Chrome Co. v. Brenntag Sw., Inc., 183 S.W.3d 133 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006) (discussion of remedial measure for DTPA additional damages)
- Tony Gullo Motors I, L.P. v. Chapa, 212 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2006) (attorney’s‑fee segregation principles)
- AKIB Construction Inc. v. Shipwash, 582 S.W.3d 791 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2019) (pleading and proof requirements for damages in default judgments)