Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith

Texas Supreme Court

Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith

796 S.W.2d 705, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 43, 1990 Tex. LEXIS 127, 1990 WL 155534

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 17, 1990

DocketD-0047

StatusPublished

Cited by63 cases

This text of 796 S.W.2d 705 (Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith, 796 S.W.2d 705, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 43, 1990 Tex. LEXIS 127, 1990 WL 155534 (Tex. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a bill of review proceeding. The trial court granted the respondent’s bill of review setting aside a summary judgment in favor of the petitioner and ordered a trial on the merits.

The court of appeals erred in reviewing this case because it lacked jurisdiction. An appeal may be prosecuted only from a final judgment which disposes of all issues and parties in the case. North East Ind. School Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893 (Tex.1966). A bill of review which sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of all the issues of the case on the merits is interlocutory in nature and not a final judgment appealable to the court of appeals or the supreme court. Warren v. Walter, 414 S.W.2d 423 (Tex.1967); Palmer v. D.O.K.K. Benevolent & Ins. Assoc., 160 Tex. 513, 334 S.W.2d 149 (1960).

Accordingly, a majority of the Court, without hearing oral argument, grants the application for writ of error, reverses the decision of the court of appeals, and dismisses the appeal because the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction. See Tex.R. App.P. 170.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a bill of review proceeding. The trial court granted the respondent’s bill of review setting aside a summary judgment in favor of the petitioner and ordered a trial on the merits.

The court of appeals erred in reviewing this case because it lacked jurisdiction. An appeal may be prosecuted only from a final judgment which disposes of all issues and parties in the case. North East Ind. School Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893 (Tex.1966). A bill of review which sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of all the issues of the case on the merits is interlocutory in nature and not a final judgment appealable to the court of appeals or the supreme court. Warren v. Walter, 414 S.W.2d 423 (Tex.1967); Palmer v. D.O.K.K. Benevolent & Ins. Assoc., 160 Tex. 513, 334 S.W.2d 149 (1960).

Accordingly, a majority of the Court, without hearing oral argument, grants the application for writ of error, reverses the decision of the court of appeals, and dismisses the appeal because the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction. See Tex.R. App.P. 170.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

796 S.W.2d 705, 34 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 43, 1990 Tex. LEXIS 127, 1990 WL 155534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tesoro-petroleum-v-smith-tex-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack