Sells v. Drott

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding pro se defendant appeared by answer even though answer was not in \'standard form'\
• reversing because the rules of procedure entitled the defendant to notice before the trial court struck her answers and granted a default judgment
• reversing and remanding on basis that answer was facially valid despite potentially defective signature
• per 1 It appears that motion was never set for a hearing, although the appellate record contains an order “dismissing” that motion on the oral agreement of the parties. -2- 04-20-00278-CV curiam

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).