Jack Carpenter v. Ina Claire Watson, Individually and as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 3, 2022
Docket09-22-00216-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Jack Carpenter v. Ina Claire Watson, Individually and as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust (Jack Carpenter v. Ina Claire Watson, Individually and as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust) 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
Jack Carpenter v. Ina Claire Watson, Individually and as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00216-CV __________________

JACK CARPENTER, Appellant

V.

INA CLAIRE WATSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE FRANK AND INA WATSON FAMILY LIVING TRUST, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 258th District Court San Jacinto County, Texas Trial Cause No. CV14,744 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Jack Carpenter and Appellee Ina Claire Watson, Individually and

as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust, filed a Joint Motion to

Dismiss Without Prejudice. The parties have agreed that the trial court’s order

granting Appellee’s Motion for Summary Judgment is an interlocutory order.

On February 22, 2022, the trial court signed an order that granted Watson’s

motion for a no-evidence summary judgment and dismissed Carpenter’s affirmative

1 defenses of “limitations, collateral estoppel, waiver, and laches[.]” On June 8, 2022,

the trial court signed an order that dismissed Carpenter’s claims that he “acquired

superior title to the property in dispute . . . by limitation by adversely possessing the

property in dispute[.]” The trial court’s orders lack language that clearly and

unequivocally demonstrates that the trial court intended the order to completely

dispose of the entire case. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex.

2001).

Through their joint motion, Carpenter and Watson agree that the appeal

should be dismissed because the trial court has not signed a final judgment that

disposes of every pending claim and party before the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.1(a)(2). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R.

App. P. 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on November 2, 2022 Opinion Delivered November 3, 2022

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

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)
Jack Carpenter v. Ina Claire Watson, Individually and as Trustee of the Frank and Ina Watson Family Living Trust, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jack-carpenter-v-ina-claire-watson-individually-and-as-trustee-of-the-texapp-2022.