Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust

Court of Appeals of Texas

Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust

DecidedNovember 9, 2021

Docket04-21-00451-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust (Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies 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

Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

FILE COPY

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas November 9, 2021

No. 04-21-00451-CV

Kody KOTHMANN, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust, Appellant

v.

Carl MENZIES, and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust, Appellees

From the 452nd District Court, Menard County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020-05655 Honorable Robert Hoffman, Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant’s notice of appeal states his intention to appeal the trial court’s July 9, 2021 order. Although the order denied Appellant’s motion for summary judgment, it granted Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment only in part. Notably, the order does not dispose of Plaintiffs’ claim for costs and attorney’s fees: It does not expressly dispose of all claims. The order does not appear final on its face. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001). Generally, our appellate jurisdiction is limited to review of final, appealable orders or judgments. See id. at 195 (noting that generally “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”). An order that does not dispose of an outstanding claim for attorney’s fees is not a final order. McNally v. Guevara, 52 S.W.3d 195, 196 (Tex. 2001) (per curiam). We ORDER Appellant to show cause in writing within TEN DAYS of the date of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195. All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court. FILE COPY

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 9th day of November, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

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

FILE COPY

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas November 9, 2021

No. 04-21-00451-CV

Kody KOTHMANN, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust, Appellant

v.

Carl MENZIES, and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust, Appellees

From the 452nd District Court, Menard County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020-05655 Honorable Robert Hoffman, Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant’s notice of appeal states his intention to appeal the trial court’s July 9, 2021 order. Although the order denied Appellant’s motion for summary judgment, it granted Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment only in part. Notably, the order does not dispose of Plaintiffs’ claim for costs and attorney’s fees: It does not expressly dispose of all claims. The order does not appear final on its face. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001). Generally, our appellate jurisdiction is limited to review of final, appealable orders or judgments. See id. at 195 (noting that generally “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”). An order that does not dispose of an outstanding claim for attorney’s fees is not a final order. McNally v. Guevara, 52 S.W.3d 195, 196 (Tex. 2001) (per curiam). We ORDER Appellant to show cause in writing within TEN DAYS of the date of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195. All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court. FILE COPY

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 9th day of November, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kody Kothmann, as Trustee of the Kody Kothmann 1992 Irrevocable Trust v. Carl Menzies and Steve Menzies, as Trustee of the Perry P. Menzies and Mary Louise Menzies Living Trust, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kody-kothmann-as-trustee-of-the-kody-kothmann-1992-irrevocable-trust-v-texapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack