In Butler v. Dal Tex Mach. & Tool Co., Inc., 627 S.W.2d 258, 260 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1982, no writ), the defendant alleged that he did not understand the citation and that he believed he would be notified of a court date. Id. He claimed that he did not understand that the citation required for him to file a written answer. Id. He further testified that he had a conversation with the constable who served him and that the constable advised him to get an attorney. Id. There was no evidence that the defendant ever sought help to understand the citation. Id. The court of appeals presumed that the citation complied with the applicable law governing its contents. Id. The court held that there was "ample evidence to support the implied finding by the trial court, whose duty it is to weigh the evidence, that the failure to file an answer was the result of . . . a conscious indifference on the part of the defendant." Id.