objection, or motion, either expressly or implicitly; or (B) refused to rule on the request, objection, or motion, and the complaining party objected to the refusal. Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a). In hen the docket sheet was relied on by the movant for other purposes. See Frommer v. Frommer, 981 S.W.2d 811, 813 n. 3 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, no pet.) (refusing to examine a docket entry to support the movant’s point of error where movant failed to request findings of fact and conclusions of law); Roever v. Roever, 824 S.W.2d 674, 676 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1992, no writ) (refusing to examine docket entry when movant claimed that docket entry supported his claim that community property estate was of no or nominal value because neither party alleged clerical error); Energo, 722 S.W.2d at 151 (<HOLDING>). Finally, in Elite Towing, Inc. v. LSI Fin.
holding that docket sheet which stated that plaintiff did not submit any evidence to contest elements of defendants motion for summary judgment when in fact plaintiff had timely filed two affidavits to contest motion could not be used to impeach judgment entered by trial court that stated that court had reviewed competent summary judgment evidence on file holding that appellants could have amended as of right after they received the motion to dismiss and prior to the trial courts decision holding that a docket entry in the orphans court need not summarize the contents of the order but need only show that an order was filed holding that docket entry could not be used to show that appellants untimely amended answer was filed with permission of the trial court in order to defeat summary judgment holding that the rendition of a judgment is the act of the court in pronouncing the judgment accompanied by a notation on the trial docket and any later document setting out in greater detail the judgment merely confirms the docket entry