Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno

Court of Appeals of Texas

Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno

DecidedAugust 5, 2022

Docket04-22-00290-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno (Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno) 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

Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas August 5, 2022

No. 04-22-00290-CV

Lorenza MATA, Appellant

v.

Paul MORENO and Mayra Moreno, Appellees

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas Trial Court No. CVW1900393 Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant seeks to appeal a judgment signed on March 30, 2021. The clerk’s record was filed on August 4, 2022. After reviewing the record, it appears that the judgment does not dispose of all claims in dispute between the parties. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (“[W]hether a judicial decree is a final judgment must be determined from its language and the record in the case.”). Specifically, it appears the judgment does not dispose of a counterclaim asserted in appellant’s March 24, 2021 first amended answer. No severance order appears in the record, and the judgment does not state that it disposes of all parties and all claims. See id. at 206.

A judgment that does not dispose of all parties and causes of action is not final and appealable. See id. at 195; Ne. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966). Nevertheless, we may treat the notice of appeal as prematurely filed and allow appellant time to present this court with a supplemental clerk’s record that includes a final, appealable order or judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.2; Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 206; Iacono v. Lyons, 6 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) (per curiam).

We therefore ABATE this appeal and REMAND this cause to the trial court. We ORDER appellant to ensure that a supplemental clerk’s record with a final, appealable judgment or order is filed in this court by September 6, 2022. If appellant fails to cure the jurisdictional defect as ordered, we will reinstate this appeal and dismiss it for want of jurisdiction without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). All other appellate deadlines are suspended pending our determination of whether we have jurisdiction over this appeal. _________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of August, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

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

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas August 5, 2022

No. 04-22-00290-CV

Lorenza MATA, Appellant

v.

Paul MORENO and Mayra Moreno, Appellees

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas Trial Court No. CVW1900393 Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

ORDER Appellant seeks to appeal a judgment signed on March 30, 2021. The clerk’s record was filed on August 4, 2022. After reviewing the record, it appears that the judgment does not dispose of all claims in dispute between the parties. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (“[W]hether a judicial decree is a final judgment must be determined from its language and the record in the case.”). Specifically, it appears the judgment does not dispose of a counterclaim asserted in appellant’s March 24, 2021 first amended answer. No severance order appears in the record, and the judgment does not state that it disposes of all parties and all claims. See id. at 206.

A judgment that does not dispose of all parties and causes of action is not final and appealable. See id. at 195; Ne. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966). Nevertheless, we may treat the notice of appeal as prematurely filed and allow appellant time to present this court with a supplemental clerk’s record that includes a final, appealable order or judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.2; Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 206; Iacono v. Lyons, 6 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) (per curiam).

We therefore ABATE this appeal and REMAND this cause to the trial court. We ORDER appellant to ensure that a supplemental clerk’s record with a final, appealable judgment or order is filed in this court by September 6, 2022. If appellant fails to cure the jurisdictional defect as ordered, we will reinstate this appeal and dismiss it for want of jurisdiction without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). All other appellate deadlines are suspended pending our determination of whether we have jurisdiction over this appeal. _________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of August, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Lorenza Mata v. Paul Moreno and Mayra Moreno, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lorenza-mata-v-paul-moreno-and-mayra-moreno-texapp-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack