into his attorney’s escrow account. 5 . The trial court also awarded HSOA $20,000 in conditional appellate fees. 6 . Villanova’s third issue is a global objection: "The trial court erred in overruling [his] objections to ... [HSOA’s] summary judgment evidence .... ” 7 .Villanova's eighth issue is also global in scope: "The trial court erred in overruling [his] objections to ... [Chin's affidavit].” 8 . We note HSOA does not argue Chin’s position as Vice President of Loan Servicing and Default Operations established she had personal knowledge. In some contexts, an affi-ant’s position within a company, by itself, is sufficient proof of personal knowledge. See, e.g., Requipco v. Am-Tex Tank & Equipment, Inc., 738 S.W.2d 299, 301 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (<HOLDING>); M.G.M. Grand Hotel, Inc. v. Castro, 8 S.W.3d
holding that a statement that the affiant is president of the company asserting a claim on an account is sufficient to affirmatively show how the affiant has personal knowledge of the affidavit statements regarding the account holding that the failure of an affidavit to be made on personal knowledge or specify how the affiant had personal knowledge of the facts asserted is a defect in substance and need not be objected to at trial to be a ground for reversal holding allegation that false affidavit was basis for arrest warrant is sufficient to state  1983 fourth amendment claim against affiant officer holding warrant not undermined and affiant did not act in bad faith where affiant relied upon erroneous statements made by third party holding that a statement that the affiant is senior vicepresident and secretary of a corporation asserting a special appearance is sufficient to affirmatively show how the affiant has personal knowledge of the affidavit statements regarding the corporations contacts with texas