Pilgrim's Pride Corporation v. Judy Mansfield Appeal from 128th District Court of Orange County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-13-00518-CV ____________________ PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, Appellant V. JUDY MANSFIELD, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________ On Appeal from the 128th District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. A-100613-C ________________________________________________________ _____________ SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION On February 26, 2015, we issued our original opinion in this case, conditionally affirming the trial court’s judgment and suggesting a remittitur of $30,000.00 from the final judgment issued by the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 46.3. We further provided that if the appellee, Judy Mansfield, filed a remittitur within fifteen days from the date of our opinion, we would reform the trial court’s judgment to reflect the award of $20,000 in future medical damages and affirm the judgment as reformed. 1 On February 26, 2015, the appellee filed a remittitur with the Clerk of the Court, stating that she desires to accept the suggested remittitur and asking that the trial court’s judgment be affirmed as reformed. We therefore issue this supplemental opinion, and in accordance with our original opinion and the appellee’s timely-filed remittitur, we reform the trial court’s judgment by reducing the amount of the damages thereby awarded by $30,000, as of the date the trial court rendered its judgment. We reform the penultimate paragraph of the trial court’s final judgment so that it states as follows: It is, therefore, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Judy Mansfield and against Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation in the amount of $502,321.87 (Five Hundred Two Thousand, Three Hundred Twenty-One Dollars, and Eighty-Seven Cents), which sum will bear post-judgment interest at a rate of 5.00% per annum until paid, for which let execution issue. Finally, given the appellee’s decision to accept the Court’s suggested remittitur, the trial court’s judgment, as reformed, is affirmed. Our original opinion remains otherwise in effect. AFFIRMED AS REFORMED. ________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Supplemental Opinion Delivered March 5, 2015 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
