opinions regarding conclusions of law. 2 . See also Tenery, 932 S.W.2d at 30 ("[Hjarm to the complaining party is presumed unless the contrary appears on the face of the record when the party makes a proper and timely request for findings and the trial court fails to comply.”). 3 , The court has up to forty days to file findings, which 0 S.W.3d 611, 616 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2003) (“There are rules and statutes addressing the continuation of the court’s business after a judge has been replaced.”); W.C. Banks, Inc. v. Team, Inc., 783 S.W.2d 783, 786 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, no writ) ("Moreover, while rule 18 specifically allows the successor judge to rule on motions pending, it does not allow rendition of judgment by a judge who has heard no evidence.”); Lykes, 601 S.W.2d at 420 (<HOLDING>); Fortenberry v. Fortenberry, 545 S.W.2d 40, 43
holding that rule 18 grants authority to some successor judges to file findings holding that neither rule 18 nor section 30002 allowed the successor to an electoral loser to file findings when the transition did not happen during the period in which the trial court was obligated to file findings holding that not even the successor to a retiring judge may file findings because retirement is not listed in rule 18 and has a statutorily distinct meaning from resignation holding that rule 18 granted a successor to a deceased judge the power to file findings holding that rule 18 granted a successor to a resigned judge the power to file findings when a case was transferred between districts