Okay so the exclamation point was for effect.

However, our office has just come across this problem. We filed suit to seize a vehicle some time ago and even obtained a default judgment back in January. The car is about to be sold at auction in two weeks. We just noticed, however, that we have an incorrect vin number in the style of the case and throughout our pleadings and the default judgement. I thought at first that a nunc pro tunc would take care of the judgement, but what about the fact that we have the case style wrong all the way through? Is this going to cause title problems for the new owner down the line? Anyone have any ideas on how to fix this issue? I remember from my Practice Court days at Baylor the concepts of misidentification and misnomer, but I can't remember now which one would apply and how they would be implicated in a siezure case. Thanks for any help you all can give.

Steve L.

Here's one off the cuff opinion: Given that it was a default judgment, you probably have no option but to start over. You can't really argue that you know that everyone with an interest in the vehicle had good notice about which vehicle you were seeking to adjudicate title to. It's not really a TRCP 28 situation, though that is the closest remedy (changing the name of a defendant to its true name -- here, the in rem defendant is the property, probably). You proably will also want to see about vacating the judgment you have because you may have 'clouded the title' of someone else's vehicle, assuming that the VIN number you used actually matches up with an existing vehicle with that VIN number.

Perhaps someone else can be more creative than me.

If it is not too late, file and have the judge grant a motion for new trial, amend your pleadings, and take another default judgment.

If you can reopen and amend your pleadings--you have to reserve the amended petition on the respondents.