Gregory Carl Morse and All Other Occupants of 223 High Point Drive, Murphy, TX 75094 v. Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the United States of America

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided February 1, 2019·No. 05-18-00999-CV·Published

Opinion

VACATE and DISMISS; and Opinion Filed February 1, 2019.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00999-CV

GREGORY CARL MORSE AND ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF 223 HIGH POINT DRIVE, MURPHY, TX 75094, Appellant V. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FANNIE MAE), A CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 004-00127-2017

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Whitehill, Molberg, and Reichek Opinion by Justice Molberg This is an appeal from a judgment in a forcible detainer suit awarding appellee possession

of the property located at 223 High Point Drive in Murphy, Texas. Before the Court is appellee’s

January 9, 2019 motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. Appellee recites in the motion that a writ

of possession was executed, and appellant and the other occupants are no longer in possession of

the property.

The only issue in a forcible detainer suit is the right to immediate possession of the

premises. Olley v. HVM, L.L.C., 449 S.W.3d 572, 575 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014,

pet. denied). Unless an appellant has a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual

possession, the issue of possession and the case become moot when the appellant is no longer in possession of the premises. See Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782,

787, 790 (Tex. 2006). When a case becomes moot on appeal, an appellate court must vacate the

trial court’s judgment and dismiss the case. See City of Dallas v. Woodfield, 305 S.W.3d 412, 416

(Tex. App.—Dallas 2010, no pet.); see also Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 790.

We gave appellant an opportunity to respond to appellee’s motion, but he failed to do so.

Because nothing in the record before us shows appellant has a potentially meritorious claim of

right to current, actual possession of the property, we grant appellee’s motion, vacate the trial

court’s judgment, and dismiss the case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 790.

/Ken Molberg/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE

180999F.P05

–2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

GREGORY CARL MORSE AND ALL On Appeal from the County Court at Law OTHER OCCUPANTS OF 223 HIGH No. 4, Collin County, Texas POINT DRIVE, MURPHY, TX 75094, Trial Court Cause No. 004-00127-2017. Appellant Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg, Justices Whitehill and Reichek No. 05-18-00999-CV V. participating.

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FANNIE MAE), A CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee

In accordance with the Court’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial court’s judgment and DISMISS the case.

Judgment entered this 1st day of February, 2019.

–3–

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

Gregory Carl Morse and All Other Occupants of 223 High Point Drive, Murphy, TX 75094 v. Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the United States of America, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Gregory Carl Morse and All Other Occupants of 223 High Point Drive, Murphy, TX 75094 v. Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the United States of America (Gregory Carl Morse and All Other Occupants of 223 High Point Drive, Murphy, TX 75094 v. Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), a Corporation Organized and Existing Under the Laws of the United States of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marshall v. Housing Authority of San Antonio
198 S.W.3d 782 (Texas Supreme Court, 2006)
City of Dallas v. Woodfield
305 S.W.3d 412 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2010)
Olley v. HVM, L.L.C.
449 S.W.3d 572 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2014)