Guadalupe Tristan Rochford v. Northstar Cemetery Services of Texas, LLC, D/B/A Restland Crematory and Northstar Funeral Services of Texas LLC D/B/A Restland Cemetery

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 16, 2024
• Docket: 05-24-00994-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed December 16, 2024

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00994-CV

GUADALUPE TRISTAN ROCHFORD, Appellant V. NORTHSTAR CEMETERY SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC D/B/A RESTLAND CREMATORY AND NORTHSTAR FUNERAL SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC D/B/A RESTLAND CEMETERY, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-01566-B

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Pedersen, III Opinion by Chief Justice Burns We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal because the appealed order is

neither a final judgment disposing of all parties and claims nor did it appear to be an

appealable interlocutory order. See Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191,

195 (Tex. 2001) (appellate courts generally have jurisdiction over final judgments

and certain interlocutory orders as permitted by statute). As directed, the parties

filed letter briefs addressing the jurisdictional issue. The procedural history of this case involves two separate cases and a transfer

order that the transferee court did not accept. Appellant, along with Gregory

Rochford, filed a lawsuit in District Court in 2022 seeking damages for negligence

involving a dispute over cremated remains (District Court case). After appellant

and Gregory Rochford nonsuited their claims, the District Court signed a nonsuit

order1 on May 27, 2022 and closed the case.

Appellant then filed the underlying lawsuit in County Court at Law No. 2 in

2023 (County Court case). Appellees moved to transfer the County Court case to

the earlier filed District Court case. On May 26, 2023, the County Court signed an

agreed order transferring the County Court case to the District Court case. The

District Court, however, refused to accept the case. This refusal by the District Court

prompted appellant to file, on April 25, 2024, a motion to reinstate in the County

Court. On May 24, 2024, the County Court signed an order stating that it was taking

no action on the motion to reinstate because it found that it had lost plenary power

after the case was transferred. Appellant filed a conditional notice of appeal from

this order.

In his letter brief, appellant states that he “believes” there is no final judgment

and that we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. He filed the notice of appeal out of an

abundance of caution should we recognize, like they do in federal court, that an order

1 The nonsuit order in the District Court case is viewable on Dallas County’s website.

–2– denying a motion to reopen an administratively closed case has the practical effect

of dismissing the case. See Stromberger v. L. Offs. of Windle Turley, P.C., No. 05-

06-00841-CV, 2007 WL 2994643, at *3 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 16, 2007, no pet.)

(mem. op.) (citing Penn West Assocs., Inc. v. Cohen, 371 F.3d 118, 124 (3d Cir.

2004)). We decline to do so. There is no authority that the appealed order is subject

to ordinary appeal in this Court.

Because the appealed order is neither a final judgment nor an appealable

interlocutory order, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal.2 We dismiss the appeal.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

240994f.p05 /Robert D. Burns, III// ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

2 Although the order is not reviewable by ordinary appeal, it may be reviewable by a petition for writ of manadams. See Texas Com. Bank, N.A. v. Prohl, 824 S.W.2d 228, 230 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1992, orig. proceeding) (noting mandamus review would be proper where litigants no longer have a forum and no final judgment can or is likely to be entered.)

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

GUADALUPE TRISTAN On Appeal from the County Court at ROCHFORD, Appellant Law No. 2, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-23-01566- No. 05-24-00994-CV V. B. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice NORTHSTAR CEMETERY Burns. Justices Molberg and SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC D/B/A Pedersen, III participating. RESTLAND CREMATORY AND NORTHSTAR FUNERAL SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC D/B/A RESTLAND CEMETERY, Appellees

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellees NORTHSTAR CEMETERY SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC D/B/A RESTLAND CREMATORY AND NORTHSTAR FUNERAL SERVICES OF TEXAS LLC D/B/A RESTLAND CEMETERY recover their costs of this appeal from appellant GUADALUPE TRISTAN ROCHFORD.

Judgment entered this 16th day of December, 2024.

–4–