Summary
On motion for rehearing, the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, withdrew and substituted its prior opinion in a dispute over deed restrictions and subdivision of a residential lot. The court held that the trial court’s order granting summary judgment was not a final judgment because it lacked decretal and finality language and did not adjudicate the parties’ claims. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the motion for rehearing as moot.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court's order stating that the defendants' motion for summary judgment should be granted constituted a final, appealable judgment despite lacking decretal language specifying the relief granted.
- Whether the subsequent nonsuit of the Dertiens' attorney-fee claim cured the order's lack of finality.
- Whether the motion for rehearing should be dismissed as moot after dismissal of the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Holdings
- An order that merely grants a motion for summary judgment, without decretal language specifying the relief granted or other language clearly disposing of all parties and issues and expressing an intent to be final, is not a final judgment and does not support appellate jurisdiction.
- The later nonsuit of a pending attorney-fee claim did not convert the trial court's nonfinal summary-judgment order into a final judgment.
- The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and the motion for rehearing was dismissed as moot.
Key quotations
“An order that merely grants a motion for judgment is in no sense a judgment itself. It adjudicates nothing.” (at 2)
“In the words of the supreme court, “It adjudicate[d] nothing.”” (at 4)
Factual background
The Walkers and Dertiens owned lots in Section IV of The Homestead Subdivision in Bee Cave, Travis County. The Dertiens began preparing to subdivide their lot into three lots, later changed to two, and the Walkers objected, asserting that the subdivision's restrictive covenants required a majority vote of the homeowners association. The Dertiens contended that the requirement was impossible to satisfy because no homeowners association had ever been created and sought declaratory relief concerning their right to subdivide.
Procedural history
The Walkers sued the Dertiens in the 353rd District Court of Travis County to enforce subdivision deed restrictions. The Dertiens asserted impossibility, sought declaratory relief, and initially requested attorney's fees. The trial court's June 6, 2023 order stated that the Dertiens' motion for summary judgment should be granted and their plea to the jurisdiction denied, but it contained no decretal language, finality language, or disposition of the attorney-fee request. Although the Dertiens later nonsuited their attorney-fee claim, the parties did not obtain a modified final judgment, so the court of appeals dismissed the attempted appeal.