Corey Morrell v. Burton Baker, Individually and in His Professional Capacity; Lummus, Hallman, Pritchard & Baker, P.C.; And Mercer Transportation Co., Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 18, 2025
Docket02-25-00439-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Corey Morrell v. Burton Baker, Individually and in His Professional Capacity; Lummus, Hallman, Pritchard & Baker, P.C.; And Mercer Transportation Co., Inc. (Corey Morrell v. Burton Baker, Individually and in His Professional Capacity; Lummus, Hallman, Pritchard & Baker, P.C.; And Mercer Transportation Co., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Corey Morrell v. Burton Baker, Individually and in His Professional Capacity; Lummus, Hallman, Pritchard & Baker, P.C.; And Mercer Transportation Co., Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-25-00439-CV ___________________________

COREY MORRELL, Appellant

V.

BURTON BAKER, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY; LUMMUS, HALLMAN, PRITCHARD & BAKER, P.C.; AND MERCER TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., Appellees

On Appeal from the 236th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 236-363739-25

Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr MEMORANDUM OPINION

We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal because the trial court has not

yet signed a final judgment or an appealable order. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.,

39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). In response, Appellant filed a “Notice of Withdrawal

of Notice of Appeal.” In this notice, Appellant acknowledged that the order he

appealed “did not clearly dispose of all claims and parties,” and he declared that he

“withdraws the pending notice of appeal at this time.” We construe Appellant’s notice

as a motion to dismiss the appeal, grant the motion, and dismiss the appeal. See Tex.

R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f); see also Mai v. Trang, No. 14-24-00529-CV,

2024 WL 3948212, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 27, 2024, no pet.)

(per curiam) (mem. op.); Stanford v. England Carrier Servs., LLC, No. 05-24-00651-CV,

2024 WL 3755271, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 12, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op.).

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice

Delivered: September 18, 2025

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Corey Morrell v. Burton Baker, Individually and in His Professional Capacity; Lummus, Hallman, Pritchard & Baker, P.C.; And Mercer Transportation Co., Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corey-morrell-v-burton-baker-individually-and-in-his-professional-texapp-2025.