Luke Kaithackal v. Mary Kay, Inc.
This text of Luke Kaithackal v. Mary Kay, Inc. (Luke Kaithackal v. Mary Kay, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
DISMISS and Opinion Filed November 10, 2023
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00568-CV
LUKE KAITHACKAL, Appellant V. MARY KAY, INC., Appellee
On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-13790
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Goldstein Opinion by Chief Justice Burns In the notice of appeal, appellant states he is appealing from the trial court’s
March 10, 2023 final judgment “that apparently granted Defendant’s Traditional
and No-Evidence Motions for Summary Judgment.” Because the trial court did
not specify in its order whether it was granting or denying the defendant’s motions
for summary judgment, we ordered the trial court to sign an order clarifying its
ruling. On July 27, 2023, the trial court signed an amended order denying
appellee’s motion for summary judgment. Because the amended order denied
appellee’s motion for summary judgment and it appeared appellant’s claims remain pending, we questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal and directed the
parties to file letter briefs. See Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195
(Tex. 2001) (generally, appeal may only be taken from final judgment that
disposes of all parties and claims).
In his letter brief, appellant agrees we lack jurisdiction unless it is first
necessary for the trial court to vacate the March order. Because that order did not
dispose of any claims, the trial court had plenary power to sign the amended order
and vacatur is unnecessary.
Because no final judgment has been rendered, we dismiss the appeal for
want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
/Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE 230568F.P05
–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
LUKE KAITHACKAL, Appellant On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-23-00568-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-13790. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice MARY KAY, INC., Appellee Burns. Justices Molberg and Goldstein participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellee MARY KAY, INC. recover its costs of this appeal from appellant LUKE KAITHACKAL.
Judgment entered November 10, 2023
–3–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Luke Kaithackal v. Mary Kay, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luke-kaithackal-v-mary-kay-inc-texapp-2023.