Shops at Broad, LLC v. Trez Shops at Broad LP, Trez Forman Capital Florida Funding, LLC, and Trez Capital (Florida) Corporation

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 29, 2023
Docket02-23-00167-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Shops at Broad, LLC v. Trez Shops at Broad LP, Trez Forman Capital Florida Funding, LLC, and Trez Capital (Florida) Corporation (Shops at Broad, LLC v. Trez Shops at Broad LP, Trez Forman Capital Florida Funding, LLC, and Trez Capital (Florida) Corporation) 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
Shops at Broad, LLC v. Trez Shops at Broad LP, Trez Forman Capital Florida Funding, LLC, and Trez Capital (Florida) Corporation, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-23-00167-CV ___________________________

SHOPS AT BROAD, LLC, Appellant

V.

TREZ SHOPS AT BROAD LP, TREZ FORMAN CAPITAL FLORIDA FUNDING, LLC, AND TREZ CAPITAL (FLORIDA) CORPORATION, Appellees

On Appeal from the 236th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 236-333903-22

Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr MEMORANDUM OPINION

Shops at Broad, LLC attempts to appeal from the trial court’s April 11, 2023

“Order Granting Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs/Third-Party Plaintiffs’ Motion to

Release Funds Held in the Court’s Registry.” We notified Shops at Broad of our

concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because that order did not appear

to be a final judgment or appealable interlocutory order. We warned that unless any

party to the appeal filed a response within ten days showing grounds for continuing

the appeal, we could dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.3(a), 44.3. Ten days have passed, and we have received no response.

Our appellate jurisdiction is limited to appeals from final judgments and from

interlocutory orders made immediately appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con

Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Because this order is neither and because there

is no final judgment in this case, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.1 See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); 3-T Expl., Inc. v. Greyfox Energy Partners LP, No. 2-06-

424-CV, 2007 WL 174467, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 25, 2007, no pet.)

(mem. op.).

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice

Delivered: June 29, 2023

1 We deny all pending motions as moot.

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

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shops at Broad, LLC v. Trez Shops at Broad LP, Trez Forman Capital Florida Funding, LLC, and Trez Capital (Florida) Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shops-at-broad-llc-v-trez-shops-at-broad-lp-trez-forman-capital-florida-texapp-2023.