What Does Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc Mean In Texas ?
Different rules govern the jurisdiction of the trial court to accomplish different acts.
A trial court has plenary power for 30 days after a judgment is signed to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct or reform its judgment. TEX.R.CIV.P. 329b(d); Matz v. Bennion, 961 S.W.2d 445, 452 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, pet. denied).
It also has inherent authority and explicit statutory authority under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 308 to enforce its orders and decrees beyond its plenary power. Matz, 961 S.W.2d at 452.
The only limit on a trial court's authority to enforce its acts is that "enforcement orders may not be inconsistent with the original judgment and must not constitute a material change in substantial adjudicated portions of the judgment." Id.
A judgment nunc pro tunc is used to correct clerical errors and may be executed after the trial court loses its plenary jurisdiction. Riner v. Briargrove Park Property Owners, Inc., 976 S.W.2d 680, 682 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, no pet.); TEX.R.CIV.P. 329b(f). Judicial errors, however, may not be corrected after a trial court loses its plenary jurisdiction. Escobar v. Escobar, 711 S.W.2d 230, 231 (Tex. 1986). a clerical error does not result from judicial reasoning, evidence or determination. Andrews v. Koch, 702 S.W.2d 584, 585 (Tex. 1986); Riner, 976 S.W.2d at 682.
It is a discrepancy between the entry of a judgment in the record and the judgment as actually rendered. Andrews, 702 S.W.2d at 585.
A judicial error occurs in the rendering, rather than the entering of a judgment. Escobar, 711 S.W.2d at 231. If the court corrects a judicial error after the expiration of its plenary power, the new judgment is void. Dikeman v. Snell, 490 S.W.2d 183, 186 (Tex. 1973); Riner, 976 S.W.2d at 682.
A judgment nunc pro tunc should be granted if the evidence is clear and convincing that a clerical error was made. Riner, 976 S.W.2d at 683.
Evidence may be in the form of oral testimony of witnesses, written documents, previous judgments, the court's docket, or the judge's personal recollection. Id.
If the judge relies on his personal recollection of the facts, we presume his personal recollection supports the finding of a clerical error. Id.