From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pan America Petroleum v. Texas Pacific Coal, Oil

Supreme Court of Texas
May 13, 1959
159 Tex. 550 (Tex. 1959)

Summary

stating general rule that a party against whom an interlocutory judgment has been rendered "will have his right of appeal when and not before the same is merged in a final judgment disposing of the whole case"

Summary of this case from In re Morgan

Opinion

No. A-7237.

May 13, 1959.

Appeal from the District Court, Upton County, C. E. Patterson, J.

L. A. Thompson, Tulsa, Okla., J. K. Smith Fort Worth, Turner, Rodgers, Winn, Scurlock Terry, Lon Sailers, Dallas, Frank Ashby, Midland, for petitioners.

Stubbeman, McRae, Sealy Laughlin, Midland, Hudson, Keltner Sarsgard, Bruce Cunningham, Ft. Worth, for respondents.


The Court of Civil Appeals has dismissed petitioners' appeal, holding that the summary judgment granted by the trial court in favor of respondents and against petitioners on one phase of the case is interlocutory and not appealable. 320 S.W.2d 915. No severance was ordered by the trial court, but petitioners say that the case involves two entirely separate, severable and independent causes of action, and that the summary judgment disposes of all issues and parties involved in one cause of action. They argue that under such circumstances the granting of the motion for summary judgment effectively severed the two causes of action by implication, and that the judgment is therefore final and appealable.

While there is authority for the argument advanced by petitioners, Richards v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 239 S.W.2d 724 (wr. ref. n.r.e.); Riggs v. Bartlett, Tex.Civ.App., 310 S.W.2d 690 (wr. ref. n.r.e.), we do not think the finality and hence the appealability of a judgment should be made to turn upon whether the action is severable as to issues, as to parties, or as to causes of action. The confusion and uncertainty involved in the application of such a rule outweight any advantages which might result therefrom. In our opinion a summary judgment which does not dispose of all parties and issues in the pending suit is interlocutory and not appealable unless a severance of that phase of the case is ordered by the trial court. Gallaher v. City Tex.Civ.App., 262 S.W.2d 807 (wr. ref.); Myers v. Smitherman, Tex.Civ.App., 279 S.W.2d 173 (no writ). In the absence of an order of severance, a party against whom such an interlocutory summary judgment has been rendered will have his right of appeal when and not before the same is merged in a final judgment disposing of the whole case.

The application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.

HAMILTON, J., not sitting.


Summaries of

Pan America Petroleum v. Texas Pacific Coal, Oil

Supreme Court of Texas
May 13, 1959
159 Tex. 550 (Tex. 1959)

stating general rule that a party against whom an interlocutory judgment has been rendered "will have his right of appeal when and not before the same is merged in a final judgment disposing of the whole case"

Summary of this case from In re Morgan

In Pan American Petroleum Corporation v. Texas Pacific Coal Oil Company, 159 Tex. 550, 324 S.W.2d 200 (1959), the court held that a summary judgment which does not dispose of all parties and issues in the pending suit is interlocutory and not appealable unless a severance of that phase of the case is ordered by the trial court, and that without the severance "a party against whom such an interlocutory summary judgment has been rendered will have his right of appeal when and not before the same is merged in a final judgment disposing of the whole case."

Summary of this case from Farris v. Raynor

In Pan American Petroleum Corporation v. Texas Pacific Coal Oil Company, 159 Tex. 550, 324 S.W.2d 200 (1959), the court said that when a summary judgment does not dispose of all parties and issues in a pending lawsuit and a severance of the phase of the case disposed of by the judgment is not ordered by the trial court, then the judgment is interlocutory and not appealable. The judgment before us falls squarely within that rule, and we are without power to review it.

Summary of this case from Templeton v. Hill

In Pan American Petroleum Corp. v. Texas Pacific Coals&sOil Co., 159 Tex. 550, 324 S.W.2d 200, the Supreme Court said: 'In our opinion a summary judgment which does not dispose of all parties and issues in the pending suit is interlocutory and not appealable unless a severance of that phase of the case is ordered by the trial court.

Summary of this case from Podgoursky v. Podgoursky
Case details for

Pan America Petroleum v. Texas Pacific Coal, Oil

Case Details

Full title:PAN AMERICAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION et al., Petitioners, v. TEXAS PACIFIC…

Court:Supreme Court of Texas

Date published: May 13, 1959

Citations

159 Tex. 550 (Tex. 1959)
159 Tex. 550

Citing Cases

Ross v. Arkwright Mut. Ins. Co.

Under Texas case law, a summary judgment that fails to dispose of all parties and issues is interlocutory and…

Teer v. Duddlesten

An appeal lies from a final summary judgment, but for a summary judgment to be final, it must dispose of all…