Opinion
NO. 14-19-00014-CV
04-07-2020
JOSH MCGINN, Appellant v. PRIME ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, Appellee
On Appeal from the 412th District Court Brazoria County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 99568-CV
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Josh McGinn appealed from the trial court's interlocutory order, signed December 9, 2018, granting a temporary injunction in favor of appellee Prime Energy Services. On November 12, 2019, the trial court signed a "Notice of Non-Suit Without Prejudice" reflecting that Prime Energy Services filed a motion for non-suit pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 162. On November 15, 2019, the Brazoria County District Clerk filed a supplemental clerk's record in this court containing the trial court's order.
The fact that a temporary injunction has been issued does not prevent the plaintiff from taking a non-suit. Gen. Land Office of State of Tex. v. OXY U.S.A., Inc., 789 S.W.2d 569, 571 (Tex.1990); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 162. "As a consequence of the trial court's granting the nonsuit, the temporary injunction ceased to exist, and the appeal became moot." OXY U.S.A., Inc., 789 S.W.2d at 571. The trial court's order granting the motion for non-suit, which vacated the temporary injunction on appeal, "is not precluded by Rule 29.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure." BP Amoco P.L.C. v. Rowan Cos., Inc., No. 14-01-00199-CV, 2001 WL 726322, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 28, 2001, pet. dism'd by agr.) (mem. op.) (granting appellees' motion to dismiss appeal for lack of jurisdiction after trial court granted appellees' motion for nonsuit, which vacated interlocutory order on appeal); see also Tex. R. App. P. 29.5 (permitting trial court to issue order dissolving interlocutory order being appealed).
Generally, this court has civil appellate jurisdiction over final judgments or interlocutory orders specifically authorized as appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014. However, after the trial court granted Prime Energy's motion for non-suit, the temporary injunction dissolved, and there is no appealable final judgment or interlocutory order. Mootness deprives this court of jurisdiction. See OXY U.S.A., Inc., 789 S.W.2d at 571. Thus, we must dismiss this case because we lack jurisdiction over McGinn's appeal after the non-suit was granted.
On March 5, 2020, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court's intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal on or before March 16, 2020. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant has not filed a response.
We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
/s/ Jerry Zimmerer
Justice Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Wise, and Zimmerer.