Robin Reames D/B/A Black Tie Roses v. Bnp Commercial Properties, Ltd.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: April 20, 2006
• Docket: 13-05-00631-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                             NUMBER 13-05-631-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

ROBIN REAMES D/B/A BLACK TIE ROSES,                    Appellant,

                                           v.

BNP COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, LTD.,                        Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

                           of Nueces County, Texas.

___________________________________________________  _______________

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION^[1]

         Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza

                             Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Robin Reames d/b/a Black Tie Roses (Reames), filed a notice of appeal with this Court on October 7, 2005, seeking to overturn a temporary injunction issued in favor of appellee, BNP Commercial Properties, LTD. (BNP).  The trial court's injunction forbade Reames from preventing BNP entry to her adjacent property for the limited purpose of repairing a damaged wall located on the boundary between the two properties.  The trial court's injunction order set the case for trial and listed a number of issues to be resolved at a final trial on the merits.  On October 21, 2005, we denied Reames's motion to enjoin the trial court's order.

BNP has now filed a motion to dismiss the interlocutory appeal.  By affidavit BNP has informed this Court that it has now completed construction on the relevant real property and no longer seeks, nor has any need to access Reames's property.  As a result, BNP asserts that this appeal has been rendered moot.  No response to the motion has been filed.

Appellate courts are prohibited from deciding moot controversies.  See Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999); Camarena v. Tex. Employment Comm'n, 754 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex. 1988).  A case becomes moot if at any stage there ceases to be an actual controversy between the parties.  See Camarena, 754 S.W.2d at 151.  When a temporary injunction becomes inoperative due to a change in status of the parties or the passage of time, the issue of its validity is also moot.  Jones, 1 S.W.3d at 86; Parr v. Stockwell, 322 S.W.2d 615, 616 (Tex. 1959) (per curiam); Tex. Educ. Agency v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 797 S.W.2d 367, 369 (Tex. App.BAustin 1990, no writ).

The temporary injunction in this case has become inoperative due to completion of construction on the damaged wall.  The work which the trial court permitted to continue under the injunction has been completed, and BNP no longer has need to access Reames's property.  Thus, there no longer exists an actual controversy regarding BNP's entry on to Reames's property.

Therefore, the Court, having considered the documents on file and BNP's motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted.  BNP's motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby dismissed as moot and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.                                                                                         

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this 20th day of April, 2006.

---

^[1]As this is a memorandum opinion and all issues of law presented by this case are well settled and the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite the law and the facts in this memorandum opinion except as necessary to advise the parties of the Court=s decision and the basic reasons for it.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.1, 47.4.