Sherry McGalliard v. Kathryn Hill, 06-16-00025-CV

Kathryn Hill owned an Andalusian brood mare (Gabacha) and leased her to Sherry McGalliard to be bred; after the lease Hill alleged the mare was unsound and sued for liquidated damages under the lease.
Hill moved for traditional summary judgment and filed two declarations (Hill and veterinarian Kenton Arnold); McGalliard did not file a response or opposing summary-judgment evidence.
The trial court granted Hill summary judgment awarding $25,000 in liquidated damages; later a bench trial awarded additional attorney’s fees and prejudgment interest.
On appeal, McGalliard argued (inter alia) trial-court error in permitting counsel to withdraw, failure to continue the summary-judgment hearing, denial of a continuance for the bench trial, and that Hill’s summary-judgment evidence was conclusory/hearsay.
The Court of Appeals held the preservation arguments regarding counsel withdrawal and summary‑judgment continuance were not preserved; denial of the bench-trial continuance was within the trial court’s discretion.
The court reversed and remanded because Hill failed to prove essential elements of her contract claim: key elements were supported only by conclusory evidence and therefore insufficient for summary judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (McGalliard)	Defendant's Argument (Hill)	Held
Permissive withdrawal of counsel without complying with Rule 10 and proceeding with summary-judgment hearing	Trial court erred by allowing counsel to withdraw and then hearing/deciding summary judgment	Withdrawal and hearing were lawful	Not preserved for appeal; point overruled
Failure to continue the summary-judgment hearing after counsel withdrawal	Hearing should have been continued because counsel withdrew shortly before hearing	No motion for continuance or showing of inability to obtain files; no sua sponte duty to continue	Not preserved for appeal; point overruled (Villegas distinguishable)
Denial of continuance of the subsequent bench trial (January setting)	Needed more time to develop facts to defend contract claim	Trial court properly denied; plaintiff focused only on contract merits (already decided)	Preserved; reviewed for abuse of discretion; denial affirmed (no abuse)
Sufficiency of summary-judgment evidence (conclusory/hearsay)	Summary-judgment evidence was conclusory and did not establish essential elements: condition at lease end, unsuitability for breeding/other uses, permanence, not hereditary/age-related	Declarations establish laminitis/founder, unsuitability, permanence, and non-hereditary/non-age causes	Reversed: key elements unsupported by non-conclusory evidence; summary judgment improper; remand for new trial

In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534 (Tex. 2003) (error preservation in trial court required for appellate review)
Villegas v. Carter, 711 S.W.2d 624 (Tex. 1986) (denial of continuance of summary-judgment hearing after recent counsel withdrawal may be erroneous where client lacks access to necessary file)
Joe v. Two Thirty Nine Joint Venture, 145 S.W.3d 150 (Tex. 2004) (standard for reviewing denial of continuance: abuse of discretion)
BMC Software Belg., N.V. v. Marchand, 83 S.W.3d 789 (Tex. 2002) (abuse-of-discretion review for continuance rulings)
City of San Antonio v. Pollock, 284 S.W.3d 809 (Tex. 2009) (bare opinions without basis do not support judgment)
Burrow v. Arce, 997 S.W.2d 229 (Tex. 1999) (expert ipse dixit insufficient to carry a claim)
Elizondo v. Krist, 415 S.W.3d 259 (Tex. 2013) (expert affidavit must show a demonstrable, reasoned basis; absence creates a fatal analytical gap)
Coastal Transp. Co. v. Crown Cent. Petroleum Corp., 136 S.W.3d 227 (Tex. 2004) (conclusory testimony cannot support judgment)
Laidlaw Waste Sys. (Dallas), Inc. v. City of Wilmer, 904 S.W.2d 656 (Tex. 1995) (recitation of ultimate facts without supporting data is conclusory)
King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. 2003) (no-evidence summary judgment standards)