For the week of September 26, 2011, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued seven opinions in civil cases.  Three of these dispose of a case without a detailed discussion of the merits (e.g., dismissing a case for want of prosecution, dismissing a case for mootness, dismissing a case pursuant to settlement).  The remaining four cases are as follows:

Copeland v. Cooper (05-09-01168-CV) – Recites well-established (1) rule that, in no-answer default cases, a defendant’s liability for all causes of action pleaded is conclusively established and all allegations of fact are deemed admitted except as to the amount of unliquidated damages; (2) reversal is required when, by no fault of appellant, he is unable to produce an appellate record; (3) rule that judgment cannot be rendered on the pleadings in post-answer default judgments; and (4) standard for reviewing trial court’s ruling on motion for new trial.

Dallas Cent. Appraisal Dist. v. Towers at Sunnyvale, LLC (05-10-01440-CV) – Recites well-established elements required for an act to constitute a judicial admission.

Jensen v. Southwest Rodeo, L.P. (05-10-00596-CV) – Recites well-established standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment.

Reagan v. Telleson Privte Bank (05-10-00444-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment; (2) rule that, when multiple grounds are raised in a motion for summary judgment and the trial court does not specify the grounds relied upon for its ruling, an appellate court will affirm the summary judgment if any of the grounds advanced in the motion are meritorious; and (3) rule that, if an appellant does not challenge each possible ground on which summary judgment could have been granted, an appellate court must uphold the summary judgment on the unchallenged ground.