law-fair-notice-pleading standard | pleading sufficiency | special exceptions |
HOUSTON CASE LAW ON FAIR NOTICE PLEADING STANDARD, SUFFICIENCY
OF PLEADINGS
Texas follows a “fair notice” standard for pleading. Horizon/CMS Healthcare Corp. v. Auld, 34 S.W.3d
887, 896 (Tex. 2000); TEX. R. CIV. P. 47(a) (a pleading “shall contain ... a short statement of the
cause of action sufficient to give fair notice of the claim involved...”). The "fair notice" requirement of
Texas pleading relieves the pleader of the burden of pleading evidentiary matters with meticulous
particularity. Bowen v. Robinson, 227 S.W.3d 86, 91 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet.
denied). In determining whether a pleading is adequate, we examine whether an opposing attorney of
reasonable competence, on review of the pleadings, can ascertain the nature and the basic issues of
the controversy and the testimony probably relevant. Id. The notice pleading standard serves to give
the opposing party information sufficient to enable him to prepare a defense. Roark v. Allen, 633 S.W.
2d 804, 810 (Tex. 1982).
Texas follows a "fair notice" standard for pleading, which looks to whether the opposing party can ascertain
from the pleading the nature and basic issues of the controversy and what testimony will be relevant.
Horizon/CMS Healthcare Corp. v. Auld, 34 S.W.3d 887, 896 (Tex. 2000). Rule 47 of the Texas Rule of Civil
Procedure provides a pleading "shall contain . . . a short statement of the cause of action sufficient to give fair
notice of the claim involved . . . ." Tex. R. Civ. P. 47. "The purpose of this rule is to give the opposing party
information sufficient to enable him to prepare a defense." Roark v. Allen, 633 S.W.2d 804, 810 (Tex. 1982).
The test of fair notice is whether an opposing attorney of reasonable competence, on review of the pleadings,
can ascertain the nature and the basic issues of the controversy and the testimony probably relevant. Bowen v.
Robinson, 227 S.W.3d 86, 91 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. denied). The "fair notice" requirement
of Texas pleading relieves the pleader of the burden of pleading evidentiary matters with meticulous
particularity. Id.
In addition to the general "fair notice" standard of Rule 47, Rule 56 states, "When items of special damage are
claimed, they shall be specifically stated." Tex. R. Civ. P. 56. This Court has stated the recovery of exemplary
damages must be "supported by express allegations." Al Parker Buick Co. v. Touchy, 788 S.W.2d 129, 130
(Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, orig. proceeding).
Marin v. IESI TX Corporation (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 11, 2010)(Opinion on rehearing by Alcala)
(forgery, misapplication of fiduciary property, fraud, and conversion of checks, exemplary damages)
We conclude that the trial court did not err in the admission of the evidence, that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient,
and that the trial court properly awarded exemplary damages. We affirm.
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Elsa Alcala
Before Justices Keyes, Alcala and Hanks
01-08-00539-CV Janell S. Marin v. IESI TX Corporation
Appeal from 412th Judicial District Court of Brazoria County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. W. Edwin Denman
TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | HOUSTON COURTS OF APPEALS |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE