El Pescador Church, Inc. v. Hector P. Ferrero, Rosa Ferrero, Antonio Nunez, and Diego Sanchez
This text of El Pescador Church, Inc. v. Hector P. Ferrero, Rosa Ferrero, Antonio Nunez, and Diego Sanchez (El Pescador Church, Inc. v. Hector P. Ferrero, Rosa Ferrero, Antonio Nunez, and Diego Sanchez) 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.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS
§ EL PESCADOR CHURCH, INC., No. 08-18-00029-CV § Appellant, Appeal from § v. 384th District Court § HECTOR P. FERRERO, of El Paso County, Texas ROSA FERRERO, ANTONIO NUNEZ, § AND DIEGO SANCHEZ, (TC # 2015DCV0484) § Appellees. §
ORDER
On its own motion, the Court issues the following order requesting supplemental letter
briefs from the parties.
El Pescador Church, Inc. filed suit asserting DTPA claims against Antonio Nunez, breach
of fiduciary duty claims against Hector Ferrero, as well as fraud and conversion claims against all
the defendants. Hector Ferrero is identified as the church’s pastor, Rosa Ferrero as his assistant,
and Antonio Nunez as an individual who may have provided services to the church. The pleadings
do not describe Diego Sanchez’s role. The church now appeals the trial court’s orders that granted
Antonio Nunez’s Plea to the Jurisdiction (asserting lack of consumer status) and his No Evidence and Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment. It has also appealed the trial court’s order
sustaining Hector Ferrero, Rosa Ferrero, and Diego Sanchez’s No Evidence Motion for Summary
Judgment.
None of the parties raised below or in their principle briefs the question of ecclesiastical
abstention. See e.g. Masterson v. Diocese of N.W. Texas, 422 S.W.3d 594, 601 (Tex. 2013); C.L.
Westbrook, Jr. v. Penley, 231 S.W.3d 389, 405 (Tex. 2007). If applicable, however, ecclesiastical
abstention raises subject matter jurisdictional concerns that this Court would be obliged to address
sua sponte. See Rusk State Hosp. v. Black, 392 S.W.3d 88, 103 (Tex. 2012) (“Subject matter
jurisdiction cannot be waived or conferred by agreement, can be raised at any time, and must be
considered by a court sua sponte.”). The parties are therefore ordered to address the following
question: To what extent, if any, does the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine affect each of the
specific claims that El Pescador Church, Inc. has raised below. Appellees are ordered to address
the issue first by filing a letter brief within twenty days of this order. Appellant is then ordered to
respond with a letter brief twenty days after the last Appellee has filed their letter brief.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019.
PER CURIAM
Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
El Pescador Church, Inc. v. Hector P. Ferrero, Rosa Ferrero, Antonio Nunez, and Diego Sanchez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/el-pescador-church-inc-v-hector-p-ferrero-rosa-ferrero-antonio-nunez-texapp-2019.