Tansah Jenae Adams v. Bank of America, N.A.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 20, 2021
Docket05-20-01069-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Tansah Jenae Adams v. Bank of America, N.A. (Tansah Jenae Adams v. Bank of America, N.A.) 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
Tansah Jenae Adams v. Bank of America, N.A., (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed April 20, 2021

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-01069-CV

TANSAH JENAE ADAMS, Appellant V. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Appellee

On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-09833

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Smith Opinion by Chief Justice Burns

We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal from the trial court’s order

granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing appellant’s breach

of contract claim as it did not appear to be final and appealable. See Lehmann v.

Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (subject to mostly statutory

exceptions, appeal may be taken only from final judgment that disposes of all parties

and claims). The record reflected that appellant originally filed suit for breach of

contract, but after appellee moved for summary judgment, appellant added a claim

for fraudulent misrepresentation. Appellee did not amend or supplement its motion for summary judgment, and the trial court’s order specifically stated only the breach

of contract claim was being dismissed.

In letter briefing filed at our request, appellant notes the record reflects the

trial date set for August 24, 2021 has been canceled and the case has been closed.

She argues that “[c]losing an entire case can only be interpreted as the case and all

claims being disposed.” However, while the record may help clarify whether an

order is final when the order is vague, it does not when, as here, the order “clearly

and unequivocally” states it does not dispose of all claims. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d

at 205-06.

Because the appealed order is not final, we dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195.

/Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

201069F.P05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

TANSAH JENAE ADAMS, On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-09833. No. 05-20-01069-CV V. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns, Justices Molberg and Smith BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., participating. Appellee

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

We ORDER that appellee Bank of America, N.A. recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant Tansah Jenae Adams.

Judgment entered April 20, 2021.

–3–

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)
Tansah Jenae Adams v. Bank of America, N.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tansah-jenae-adams-v-bank-of-america-na-texapp-2021.