Kara Cunningham v. Everett Trost

CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)
DecidedFebruary 9, 2026
Docket07-26-00086-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Kara Cunningham v. Everett Trost (Kara Cunningham v. Everett Trost) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kara Cunningham v. Everett Trost, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-25-00322-CV No. 07-26-00086-CV

KARA CUNNINGHAM, APPELLANT

V.

PATRIOT MOBILE LLC D/B/A PATRIOT MOBILITY LLC AND EVERETT TROST, APPELLEES

On Appeal from the 352nd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 352-350277-24, Honorable Joshn Burgess, Presiding1

February 9, 2026 ORDER OF SEVERANCE AND DISMISSAL Before PARKER, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, Kara Cunningham, sued Appellees, Patriot Mobile LLC d/b/a Patriot

Mobility LLC2 and Everett Trost, Chief Operating Officer, for various violations of the

Texas Labor Code following her dismissal from employment. She also sought declaratory

1 This cause was originally filed in the Second Court of Appeals and was transferred to this Court

by a docket-equalization order of the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 73.001. In the event of any conflict, we apply the transferor court’s case law. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.

2 Patriot Mobile asserts Cunningham incorrectly named it “Patriot Mobility LLC.” relief and alleged gross negligence. By separate orders, the trial court granted Patriot

Mobile’s motion for summary judgment, plea to the jurisdiction, supplemental motions

thereto, and Trost’s motion for summary judgment.

Now pending before this Court is a Partial Motion to Dismiss Appeal as to Claims

Against Appellee, Everett Trost, filed by Cunningham. She asserts that by her brief, any

claims against Trost were abandoned and requests he be dismissed as a party to this

appeal pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Counsel

for Trost does not oppose the motion. Granting the motion will not prevent any party from

seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled.

Accordingly, we sever Cunningham’s appeal against Trost into Cause Number 07-

26-00086-CV, grant Cunningham’s motion to dismiss as to Trost, and dismiss the appeal

as to him. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(b) (permitting disposition of severable portions of an

appeal if it will not prejudice remaining parties). Costs of the severed appeal shall be

taxed against Cunningham. See id. at 42.1(d). No motion for rehearing will be

entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Also pending in this Court is Trost’s Motion to Stay Response Brief Pending

Disposition of Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss. Our severance and disposition of the appeal

as to Trost renders his motion moot.

Cunningham’s appeal against Patriot Mobile LLC shall proceed in due course

under appellate cause number 07-25-00322-CV.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam 2

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kara Cunningham v. Everett Trost, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kara-cunningham-v-everett-trost-txctapp7-2026.