McGuire, James A.,McGuire, Sondra L. and Minori-Corp., Inc. v. Tampico Cove Condominiums Owners Association, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 30, 2002
• Docket: 14-02-00092-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                                                                        _________________ 

NO. 14-02-00092-CV

____________

JAMES A. McGUIRE, SONDRA L. McGUIRE, and MINORI-CORP., INC., Appellants

V.

TAMPICO COVE CONDOMINIUMS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 122nd District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 96CV0732

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from an order granting summary judgment, signed October 26, 2001.  On February 25, 2002, appellants filed a motion to abate and remand.  Appellants contended the judgment was interlocutory and not appealable.  Accordingly, they asked that this court abate the appeal and remand to the trial court.  We deny this motion and dismiss the appeal.

The clerk=s record was filed on May 8, 2002.  The record reveals that the summary judgment, signed on October 26, 2001, granted judgment on appellee=s claims against appellants.  The judgment did not adjudicate appellants= third party claims against Charles L. Jackson, George Wood, and Pleasant Grove Missionary Baptist Church.  The order does not contain any language indicating finality, other than Mother Hubbard language and the phrase, AThis is a final judgment.@  The order also includes Mother Hubbard language.  Neither use of the term Afinal judgment,@ nor Mother Hubbard language is sufficient to transform an interlocutory judgment into a final, appealable judgment.  Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001).  If an order adjudicates a plaintiff=s claims but does not adjudicate a cross-claim or third party claim, the order does not finally dispose of all claims.  Id. at 205.  Because the judgment does not adjudicate all claims, the judgment is interlocutory and not appealable.  Id. at 205-06

Lehmann provides for abatement and remand to the trial court only under circumstances in which the appellate court is unable to determine whether the judgment was intended to be final.  Id. at 206.  Because we are able to determine that the judgment is not final, we need not abate and remand for findings.

Accordingly, the order granting summary judgment in this case is interlocutory and not appealable.  The appeal is ordered dismissed. 

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed May 30, 2002.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).