Opinion
No. 6902.
Decided June 30, 1937.
Workmen's Compensation — Appeal and Error — Remittitur.
Where writ of error has been granted and cause reversed and remanded on the ground of excessiveness of judgment, and defendant in error has filed a remittitur of sufficient to account for the greatest possible amount of excessiveness in the judgment, the Supreme Court will set aside its former judgment and affirm the judgments of the lower courts for the amount of the judgment after the remittitur has been allowed.
Suit by H. G. White who seeks to recover compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Law against the Texas Employers' Insurance Association, for injuries received by him in the course of his employment. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of White for a lump sum for a period of 401 weeks from the date his incapacity began, which plaintiff in error contends results in an excessive judgment. The judgment was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals ( 79 S.W.2d 911), and error was brought to the Supreme Court. On first hearing the judgments were reversed and cause remanded on the theory that the compensation was awarded for a period extending beyond the end of 401 weeks from the date of the injury ( 99 S.W.2d 904).
Upon motion for rehearing this judgment was set aside, and remittitur having been filed by the defendant in error, the judgments were affirmed.
Lawther, Cox Cramer, and Shelby S. Cox, all of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.
Grisham Bros., of Eastland, for defendant in error.
The defendant in error having filed in this Court a remittitur of $1970.10 as of the date of the original judgment, which reduces the principal sum of that judgment from $6352.41 to $4382.31, and it appearing that the remittitur is sufficient to account for the greatest possible amount of excessiveness in the judgment, it is ordered that the judgment heretofore entered herein reversing and remanding the cause be set aside and in lieu thereof that the judgments of the trial court and of the Court of Civil Appeals be reformed so as to award to defendant in error a recovery of the amount above named and as reformed, that said judgments be affirmed. Texas N. O. R. R. Co. v. Carr, 91 Tex. 332, 43 S.W. 18. The costs of appeal will be assessed against defendant in error.
Opinion delivered June 30, 1937.