Summary
In Prescott v. Duncan, 126 Tenn. 106, 148 S.W. 229 [1912], this Court upheld the validity of the Shelby County statute and in the course of its opinion said: "* * * [I]t is manifest that the Legislature may take from the county court all power not conferred upon it by the Constitution expressly or by necessary implication."
Summary of this case from Ruckhart v. SchubertOpinion
No. 07-12-00330-CV
11-14-2013
DAVID NEAL DUNCAN, APPELLANT v. GARY F. PRESCOTT, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the 251st District Court
Randall County, Texas
Trial Court No. 60,787-C, Honorable Don Emerson, Presiding
ON CONSENT TO REMITTITUR
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Appellee, Gary F. Prescott, has timely filed with this Court his consent to remittitur as suggested by this Court's order dated October 11, 2013. See Duncan v. Prescott, No. 07-12-00330-CV, 2013 Tex.App. LEXIS 12705, at *16-17 (Tex. App.— Amarillo Oct. 11, 2013, order). Pursuant to our order and in accordance with Prescott's consent to the remittitur, we reform the trial court's judgment to reflect that Prescott recover from David Neal Duncan $10,000.00 in exemplary damages along with $1,650.00 in compensatory damages as already recited in the trial court's original judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 46.3.
We affirm the trial court's judgment as so reformed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b).
Mackey K. Hancock
Justice