Robert Embser, Jr. v. Steve Breneman

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 5, 1998
Docket03-97-00765-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Robert Embser, Jr. v. Steve Breneman (Robert Embser, Jr. v. Steve Breneman) 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
Robert Embser, Jr. v. Steve Breneman, (Tex. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN




NO. 03-97-00765-CV

Robert Embser, Jr., Appellant


v.



Steve Breneman, Appellee



FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 96-03752, HONORABLE PAUL R. DAVIS, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

Steve Breneman brought a bill of review seeking to set aside a default judgment rendered against him. The trial court granted the bill of review, set aside the default judgment, and granted a new trial. The trial court did not, however, reach the merits of the underlying cause of action. An order granting a bill of review that sets aside a prior judgment without disposing of all issues in the cause on the merits is interlocutory and not appealable. Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith, 796 S.W.2d 705, 705 (Tex. 1990); Shahbaz v. Feizy Import & Export Co., 827 S.W.2d 63, 64-65 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, no writ); Crabtree v. Crabtree, 627 S.W.2d 486, 487-88 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1981, no writ); Harrell v. Black, 329 S.W.2d 127, 129 (Tex. Civ. App.--Waco 1959, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

This Court, with exceptions not applicable here, has jurisdiction only over a final judgment that disposes of all issues and all parties. North E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966); Pelt v. State Bd. of Ins., 802 S.W.2d 822, 826 (Tex. App.--Austin 1990, no writ). Because no final judgment exists in this cause, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. (1) See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).



Before Justices Powers, Kidd and B. A. Smith



Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction



Filed: March 5, 1998



Do Not Publish

1. By letter of January 16, 1998, the parties were given the opportunity to provide the Court with any reasons why the judgment might be final, or to notify the Court if any documents showing finality had been omitted from the clerk's record. Breneman responded with a letter brief of additional authorities supporting the lack of finality. Appellant Embser has not responded.

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

Related

Pelt v. State Board of Insurance
802 S.W.2d 822 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Crabtree v. Crabtree
627 S.W.2d 486 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1981)
North East Independent School District v. Aldridge
400 S.W.2d 893 (Texas Supreme Court, 1966)
Shahbaz v. Feizy Import & Export Co.
827 S.W.2d 63 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith
796 S.W.2d 705 (Texas Supreme Court, 1990)
Harrell v. Black
329 S.W.2d 127 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Robert Embser, Jr. v. Steve Breneman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-embser-jr-v-steve-breneman-texapp-1998.