Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// WF Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.// Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 28, 2022
Docket03-22-00393-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// WF Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.// Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC (Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// WF Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.// Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC) 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
Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// WF Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.// Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-22-00393-CV

Appellant, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// Cross-Appellant, WF Property Owners Association, Inc.

v.

Appellees, Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.//Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC

FROM THE 53RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-GN-21-002370, THE HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Waterford Lago Vista, LLC, and Cross-Appellant WF Property Owners

Association, Inc., have filed petitions for permissive appeal seeking to challenge an interlocutory

order denying their motions for summary judgment and granting in part Appellee Waterford

Development Partners, LP’s motion for summary judgment. They have filed also a joint

opposed motion for stay of trial proceedings pending appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.

Code § 51.014(d); Tex. R. App. P. 28.3. To be entitled to a permissive appeal from an

interlocutory order that would not otherwise be appealable, the requesting party must establish

that (1) the order to be appealed involves a “controlling question of law as to which there is a

substantial ground for difference of opinion” and (2) an immediate appeal from the order

“may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.

Code § 51.014(d); see Tex. R. App. P. 28.3(e)(4); Tex. R. Civ. P. 168. Because we conclude that the petition fails to establish each requirement of Rule 28.3(e)(4), we deny the petition for

permissive appeal, as well as the motion to stay proceedings. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.3(e)(4).

__________________________________________ Chari Kelly, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly

Filed: October 28, 2022

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

Related

§ 51.014
Texas CP § 51.014(d)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Waterford Lago Vista, LLC// WF Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Waterford Development Partners, LP and WF Property Owners Association, Inc.// Cross-Appellee, Waterford Lago Vista, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waterford-lago-vista-llc-wf-property-owners-association-inc-v-texapp-2022.