Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction because the trial court's summary judgment was interlocutory rather than final. The judgment left the amount of attorney's fees and court costs to be determined later and did not clearly dispose of all claims and parties.
Holdings
- The court lacked jurisdiction because the trial court's summary judgment was interlocutory rather than final and appealable.
Questions Presented
- Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction over an appeal from the trial court's July 17, 2025 summary judgment.
- Whether the summary judgment was final and appealable when it left the amount of attorney's fees and court costs for later determination.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (7)
- Freedom Commc’ns, Inc. v. Coronado, 372 S.W.3d 621, 624 (Tex. 2012)(followed)
- Sabre Travel Int’l, Ltd. v. Deutsche Lufthansa AG, 567 S.W.3d 725, 736 (Tex. 2019)(followed)
- Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 192–93 (Tex. 2001)(followed)
- Wright v. Liming, 702 S.W.3d 666, 673 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2024, no pet.)(followed)
- Connect MGA LLC v. Waldrop, No. 02-22-00259-CV, 2023 WL 109736, at *3 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 5, 2023, no pet.) (mem. op.)(followed)
- Spillman v. Las Colinas Ass’n, No. 05-22-00005-CV, 2022 WL 999942, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Apr. 4, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op.)(followed)
- In re A.C.T.M., 682 S.W.3d 234, 235 n.2 (Tex. 2023) (per curiam)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…