Summary
The Texas Thirteenth Court of Appeals dismissed Stellar Virtual Texas’s appeal for want of jurisdiction. The court held that the trial court’s order denying a plea to the jurisdiction, a Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 91a motion to dismiss, and a motion for summary judgment was interlocutory, and no statutory basis for an interlocutory appeal was shown.
Holdings
- The order denying Stellar's plea to the jurisdiction, Rule 91a motion to dismiss, and motion for summary judgment was interlocutory because it did not dispose of all parties and claims and did not clearly and unequivocally state that it disposed of the entire case.
- The court lacked jurisdiction because Stellar identified no statute authorizing an interlocutory appeal from the order, and the appellate record disclosed no such statutory basis.
Questions Presented
- Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction over an appeal from an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction, Rule 91a motion to dismiss, and motion for summary judgment when the order did not dispose of all parties and claims.
- Whether any statute authorized an interlocutory appeal from the trial court's order.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (7)
- In re Stellar Virtual Tex., No. 13-26-00202-CV, 2026 WL 1017728, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Apr. 14, 2026) (orig. proceeding)(followed procedurally)
- State ex rel. Best v. Harper, 562 S.W.3d 1, 7 (Tex. 2018)(followed)
- City of Houston v. Estate of Jones, 388 S.W.3d 663, 666 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam)(followed)
- Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex. 2001)(followed)
- In re Estrada, 492 S.W.3d 42, 46 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2016, no pet.)(followed)
- Sabre Travel International, Ltd. v. Deutsche Lufthansa AG, 567 S.W.3d 725, 734 (Tex. 2019)(followed)
- Elephant Insurance Co., LLC v. Kenyon, 644 S.W.3d 137, 146 (Tex. 2022)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…