# Advance Loan Service v. Mandik

> Court of Appeals of Texas · September 27, 1957 · 306 S.W.2d 754

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9647978

## Case

- **Full name:** ADVANCE LOAN SERVICE Et Al., Appellants, v. Charles L. MANDIK, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** September 27, 1957
- **Citations:** 306 S.W.2d 754; 1957 Tex. App. LEXIS 2113
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Young
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9647978

## Opinion text

On Motion for Rehearing.
Ground 6 of appellants’ motion reads:
“The Court of Civil Appeals erred in affirming the judgment of the trial court which was based upon issues submitted in a divisible manner regarding the damages sustained by the appellee, which issues inquired of the damages sustained by the ap-pellee as a result of the actions of the four respective loan offices, whereas the proper issue was what was the total damages sustained by the appellee, as held by the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, in the case of Riley v. Industrial Finance Service Company, Tex.1957, 302 S.W.2d 652 .”
Thus attempted to be raised for the first time is a point not heretofore presented in trial court or on appeal. Appellants have wholly failed up to this juncture to assert error with respect to the matter in question. Specific instances of such failures are: In second amended original answer; in exceptions to the charge (not made part of the record by appellants) ; in their amended motion for new trial; and lastly in.the brief of appellants filed in. this Court. They are therefore not entitled to now complain of manner of submission of the damage issues on motion for rehearing.
Said motion, upon consideration, is in all things overruled.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9647978. Public record. Not legal advice.