WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc. and Ameriquest Mortgage Company v. Rickey Joe Preston and Judy G. Preston

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 12, 2008
Docket06-08-00009-CV
StatusPublished

This text of WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc. and Ameriquest Mortgage Company v. Rickey Joe Preston and Judy G. Preston (WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc. and Ameriquest Mortgage Company v. Rickey Joe Preston and Judy G. Preston) 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
WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc. and Ameriquest Mortgage Company v. Rickey Joe Preston and Judy G. Preston, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-08-00009-CV ______________________________

WM SPECIALTY MORTGAGE, L.L.C., AMC MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC. AND AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY, Appellants

V.

RICKEY JOE PRESTON AND JUDY G. PRESTON, Appellees

On Appeal from the 294th Judicial District Court Van Zandt County, Texas Trial Court No. 05-00396

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal by WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc., and

Ameriquest Mortgage Company from a summary judgment. On our initial review of the clerk's

record, received January 25, 2008, this Court noted that the judgment from which the appeal was

brought did not dispose of all issues and all parties. On January 28, we mailed a letter to the

appellants requesting that they show this Court how we had jurisdiction over the appeal.

We have now received a "Notice Regarding Want of Jurisdiction" from the appellants, stating

that, after their review of the trial court's record, all parties and all claims have not been disposed of

by the judgment.

The general rule is that a final and appealable judgment must determine the entire

controversy, disposing of all the parties and issues in a case. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d

191, 195 (Tex. 2001).

Accordingly, because the judgment of the trial court does not dispose of all parties and all

issues, and is therefore nonappealable, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice

Date Submitted: February 11, 2008 Date Decided: February 12, 2008

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)
WM Specialty Mortgage, L.L.C., AMC Mortgage Services, Inc. and Ameriquest Mortgage Company v. Rickey Joe Preston and Judy G. Preston, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wm-specialty-mortgage-llc-amc-mortgage-services-in-texapp-2008.