Paul Gutierrez v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Opinion

Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 5, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00856-CV

PAUL GUTIERREZ, Appellant V.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 18-CCV-062709

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed September 25, 2018. The clerk’s record was filed November 14, 2018. No reporter’s record or brief was filed.

On January 11, 2019, appellee filed a motion to dismiss this appeal as moot. In its motion appellee alleged that the matter before the court is an appeal of a trial court’s judgment rendered in a forcible detainer action. According to appellee’s motion appellant failed to adequately supersede the judgment and on or around October 17, 2018, appellee executed a writ to enforce the judgment and obtained possession of the subject property. Appellee argues that this court should dismiss the appeal as moot because there is no longer an actual controversy between the parties.

An appeal from a forcible-detainer action becomes moot if the appellant is no longer in possession of the property, unless the appellant holds and asserts “a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession” of the property. Marshall v. Housing Auth. of the City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 786–87 (Tex. 2006); see also Wilhelm v. Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n, 349 S.W.3d 766, 768–69 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.).

Appellant has not responded to appellee’s motion to dismiss. To determine whether appellant has asserted “a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession,” this court, on January 29, 2019, issued an order stating that unless appellant filed a brief on or before February 13, 2019, the court would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

Appellant filed no brief or other response. Accordingly, appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Hassan, and Poissant.