in Re Albert Morris

Opinion

Opinion issued November 23, 2009

In The

Court of Appeals

For the

First District of Texas

____________

NOS. 01-09-00765-CV

01-09-00766-CV

01-09-00767-CV

IN RE ALBERT R. MORRIS, Relator

Original Proceedings on Petitions for Writs of Injunction

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Albert R. Morris has filed petitions for writs of injunction directed against respondents American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. (case number 01-09-00765-CV), the Honorable Ben W. Childers, judge of the County Court at Law No. 1 (case number 01-09-00766-CV), and the Honorable Dianne Wilson, Fort Bend County Clerk (case number 01-09-00767-CV), seeking to enjoin the respondents from executing on an August 19, 2009 judgment for possession of a residence. See Am. Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. v. Morris, No. 09-CCV-039965 (Co. Ct. at Law No. 4, Fort Bend County, Tex. Aug. 19, 2009). In a separate matter before our Court, Morris has also appealed the trial court's August 19, 2009 judgment. See Morris v. Am. Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., No. 01-09-00768-CV (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 28, 2009) (notice of appeal filed).

A court of appeals may grant injunctive relief for the purpose of protecting its jurisdiction over a pending appeal and to preserve the subject matter of the litigation so that the appeal does not become moot. See Dallas Morning News v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 842 S.W.2d 655, 658 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); Becker v. Becker, 639 S.W.2d 23, 24 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1982) (orig. proceeding); see also Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(a) (Vernon 2004) ("Each court of appeals or a justice of a court of appeals may issue a writ of mandamus and all other writs necessary to enforce the jurisdiction of the court.").

Morris has not established that enjoining the issuance of a writ of possession is necessary to protect this Court's jurisdiction over the appeal and preserve the underlying property so that the appeal does not become moot. The petitions do not ask this Court to restrain a sale of the underlying property. If Morris should be successful in his appeal, this Court and the trial court will have ample authority to grant appropriate relief to the parties. There being no threat to our jurisdiction over the appeal, the remedy available to Morris to prevent enforcement of the judgment is supersedeas. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.1(f).

Accordingly, we dismiss the petitions for writs of injunction for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Massengale.