Nikolas Panagiotopoulos v. PI KAPPA PHI Fraternity and Josue Jimenez

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 13, 2025
• Docket: 03-25-00315-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00315-CV

Nikolas Panagiotopoulos, Appellant

v.

PI KAPPA PHI Fraternity and Josue Jimenez, Appellee

FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-GN-19-008674, THE HONORABLE JESSICA MANGRUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On May 9, 2025, Nikolas Panagiotopoulos filed a petition for permissive appeal

from the trial court’s September 25, 2023 order granting partial summary judgment. See Tex.

Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(d); Tex. R. Civ. P. 168; Tex. R. App. P. 28.3. The petition is

untimely. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(f) (providing that appellate court may

accept permitted appeal filed “not later than the 15th day after the date the trial court signs the

order to be appealed”). Moreover, the interlocutory order that Panagiotopoulos seeks to appeal

fails to satisfy Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 168 in that the permission is not stated in that

order as required by that rule. Tex. R. Civ. P. 168. Finally, the order purporting to grant the

permission to appeal does not identify a controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion or state why an immediate appeal may materially

advance the ultimate termination of the litigation. Id. Accordingly, the petition is denied.1

__________________________________________ Karin Crump, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Crump and Ellis

Filed: August 13, 2025

1 We need not and therefore do not reach the question of whether an amended order that complied with the cited authorities would merit granting a timely filed petition.