Emphasizing “our common-sense approach to error preservation,” in Browder v. Moree the Texas Supreme Court held:
If a trial court indicates that it will proceed with a bench trial in a case where a jury demand was timely perfected, a demanding party that still wishes to have a jury trial must ensure that the court is aware of the demand. But neither our procedural rules nor this Court’s decisions require a party that has obtained an adverse ruling from the trial court to take the further step of objecting to that ruling to preserve it for appellate review. Once the trial court denied Browder’s request for a jury trial, Browder had no choice but to go forward with the bench trial. … ‘If simply adhering to an adverse order while continuing to litigate waived review of that order on appeal from a final judgment, there would be few orders left to review.’”
No. 21-0691 (June 24, 2022) (per curiam) (citation omitted).
The post When one objection is enough. appeared first on 600 Commerce.