Trinidad Sanchez v. JXJ Homes, LLC

Opinion

In the

Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-26-00034-CV

___________________________

TRINIDAD SANCHEZ, Appellant

V.

JXJ HOMES, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2025-010021-1

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Trinidad Sanchez, appearing pro se, attempts to appeal from a

judgment rendered against him in the underlying forcible-detainer action.

On April 7, 2026, we sent Appellant a letter stating that the court was

concerned that this appeal was moot. We explained that

[i]t has come to this court’s attention that on February 4, 2026, the writ of possession issued in this case was executed and that [A]ppellant is therefore no longer in actual possession of the property at issue in this appeal. A case becomes moot if, at any stage of the proceedings, a controversy ceases to exist between the parties. See Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2006); Williams v. Lara, 52 S.W.3d 171, 184 (Tex. 2001). An appeal in a forcible[-]detainer case becomes moot when the appellant vacates the property unless the appellant holds and asserts a meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession of the property. See Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 787. When a case becomes moot on appeal, we must dismiss the case. See id. at 790.

Because [A]ppellant is no longer in actual possession of the property and does not appear to be asserting a claim of right to current possession of the property, we are concerned that this appeal is moot.

After calling this issue to Appellant’s attention, we gave him until April 17, 2026 to

show grounds for continuing the appeal and warned him that the appeal could be

dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. But that deadline has passed, and he has

not responded.

Because Appellant is no longer in possession of the property; because he has

not identified an ongoing, live controversy between the parties; and because he has

not responded with any other grounds for continuing the appeal, we vacate the trial

court’s judgment and dismiss the case as moot. Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(e); see Marshall,

3

198 S.W.3d at 785–90 (holding that because the “case [wa]s moot[,] . . . the court of

appeals erred in dismissing only the appeal and leaving the trial court’s judgment in

place”); Hizar v. 777 ER, LLC, No. 02-24-00549-CV, 2025 WL 876778, at *1 (Tex.

App.—Fort Worth Mar. 20, 2025, no pet.) (vacating judgment and dismissing case in

a similarly moot appeal from a forcible-detainer judgment).

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice

Delivered: May 14, 2026