Preview
ELLE 'CUP y
|
NUECES COUNTY :couamouse
CHIEF JUSTICE 901 LEOPARD. 10TH FLOOR
DORI CONTRERAS CORPUS CHRISTIJTEXAS 78401
36138$0416 (IEL)
JUSTICES
361 388-0794 (FAX)
GINA M. BENAVIDES
L
NORA L.LONGORIA HIDALGO coum'x
LETICIA HINOJOSA
COURTHOUSE ANNEX m
AIME T ER N
JcLARlssUA31h; @flufi 0t mpealfi 100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR
EDINBURG. TEXAS 78539
956-318-2405 (TEL)
CLE§¥HY s. MILLS mifieemh Eight,“ 0f mzxag 956'318'2403 (FAX)
wwwl Ixcourfs. gov/f 3rhcoa
August 11, 2022
Hon. J. Michael Moore Hon. David M. Diaz
Moore Law Firm Jones, Davis & Jackson, P.C.
4900 North 10th SL, Suite F-3 151 10 Dallas Parkway, Ste. 300
McAllen, TX 78504 Dallas, TX 75248
* *
DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL "'
DELIVERED VlA
E—MAlfififi-‘ED
Pablo Gama m g0 01cm CKWM
Hon. m, _'
Garza & Gonzales, P.L.L.C.
t
'-
621 s. 10th Ave. AUG ll 2022
Edinburg ’
TX 78539-4422
t t LAURA '
‘1"
CLERK
DELIVERED VlA E—MAIL L
Wick also county
Re: Cause No. 13-22-00272-cv BY A .
DeputyfiM
Tr.Ct.No. C—1392—21-B :
Style: G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C. v. Walid Haidar, and as
representative of 415 Trenton, L.L.C. d/b/a Walk-On's ports Bistreaux, and
Mousse Haider. Individually, and as representative of 15 Trenton, L.L.C.
dlb/a Walk-On's Sports Bistreaux
Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date.
Very truly yours.
Kathy S. Mills, Clerk
Enc.
cc: 93rd District Court/Hidalgo County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
Hon. Laura Hinojosa, District Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
Hon. Missy Medary, Presiding Judge, Fifth Administrative Judicial Region
(DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)
EN’CLQ EM
95mm Courtsflo County
35‘ ’
I Deputym
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
13-22-00272—CV
I
G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C.
'
v.
Walid Haidar Individually, and as representative of 415 Trenton, L. L. C.d/b/a Walk- On's
Sports Bistreaux and Mousse Haider Individually, and as representative of415
Trenton L. L. C d/b/a Walk- On‘ s Sports Bistreaux
On Appeal from the
l
93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas I
Trial Court Cause No. C-1392-21-B
I
JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cau'se on
appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the :éppeal
DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against
appellant. .
|
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
August 11. 2022
Mflgfg M
NUMBER 13-22-00272-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS ;i
CORPUS CHRISTI — EDINBURG i‘
G&G CLOSED CIRCUIT EVENTS, L.L.C., Appellant,
v.
WALID HAIDAR, INDIVIDUALLY, AND
AS REPRESENTATIVE OF 415 TRENTON, L.L.C. |
D/B/A WALK-ON’S SPORTS BISTREAUX, AND I
MOUSSA HAIDER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS ."
REPRESENTATIVE OF 41 5 TRENTON, L.L.C. !
DIBIA WALK-ON’S SPORTS BISTREAUX, Appellees.
On appeal from the 93rd District Court I:
of Hidalgo County, Texas. -
MEMORANDUM OPINION
|
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijer-ina
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria
Appellant G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C. (G&G) filed a notice of appeal on
June 14, 2022, and an amended notice of appeal on June 15, 2022, regarding a default
|
i
judgment that had been rendered against it. The documents originaily provideq with
I.
appellant’s notice of appeal indicated that the notice of appeal had not been timely? filed.
Accordingly, on June 15, 2022, the Clerk of this Court advised appellant that the éppeal
had not been timely perfected. The Clerk directed appellant to correct this deflect, if
possible, and advised appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect w:as not
cured within ten days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(8). Appellant did not respond to the (Elerk’s
notice regarding the timeliness ofthe appeal. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c). g
The Court has now received and reviewed the clerk’s record and a supplemental
clerk’s record. Based on our review, appellant's notice of appeal was timely. bith the
default iudgment at issue was interlocutory in nature. As shown by the clerk’s rfecord,
Walid Haidar, individually, and as representative of 415 Trenton, L.L.C. d/b/a Wallk-On’s
Sports Bistreaux (plaintiffs), filed suit against G&G on grounds that G&G failed to provide
Closed circuit sporting events as promised by contract. These plaintiffs subseqhently
sought a defautt judgment against G&G on grounds that G&G had been served witp their
lawsuit but failed to appear in the proceedings or file an answer. On July 20, 202l1, the
I'
trialcourt entered a default judgment against G&G.
On August 19, 2021, G&G filed a motion for new trial seeking to set asifcje the
default judgment. On September 28, 2021, the trial court granted G&G's motion fidr new
trial and set aside the default judgment. On October 19, 2021, G&G filed its Sriginal
answer, and on October 20, 2021, G&G filed a counterclaim and third-party fietition
|
>-
against Walid Haidar. 415 Trenton, L.L.C., and Mousse Haidar, individually and!:d/b/a
Walk-On‘s Sports Bistreaux and Bar.
On November 18, 2021. the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the trial
court's September 28, 2021 order setting aside the default judgment. On December 27,
2021, the plaintiffs and third-party counter—defendant Mousse filed their original a:nswer
in “Plaintiff/Counter Defendant and Third—Party Counter Defendant Original Answér and
General Denial." On December 29, 2021, Mousse filed a “First Amended Original AAswer,
General Denial, and Affirmative Defenses." On February 28, 2022, the trial court éigned
an "Order Granting Plaintiff‘s [sic] Motion for Reconsideration." This order granits the
plaintifis’ motion for reconsideration, reinstates the default judgment of July 20, 202.11, and
vacates the September 28, 2021 order granting a new trial.
{I
An appellate court has “an obligation to examine [its] jurisdiction any time litis in
doubt . ..
.”
Pike v. Tex. EMC Mgmt, LLC, 61 O S.W.3d 763, 774 (Tex. 2020). As a general
rule, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har—Con Coirpu 39
S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). “Exceptions t0 this general rule are provided by séétfites
that specifically authorize interlocutory appeals of particular orders." City of Watéuga v.
Gordon, 434 S.W.3d 586, 588 (Tex. 2014); see, e.g., TEX. Clv. PRAC. & REM. COD!|E ANN.
§ 51 .014 (listing several interlocutory orders that may be appealed).
i
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file alind the
applicable law, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Based ion the
record, G&G has pending counterclaims and third-party claims which have noli been
resolved. There is no final judgment, and the record fails to indicate that a I'statule
|
authorizes an interlocutory appeal. See City of Watauga, 434 S.W.3d at 588; Leh'mann,
39 S.W.3d at 195. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack ofjurisdiction. See IEX. R.
L
APP. P. 42.3(3).
i
NORA L. LONGORIA
Jusfice
Delivered and filed on the
11th day of August, 2022.
Preview
ELLE 'CUP y | NUECES COUNTY :couamouse CHIEF JUSTICE 901 LEOPARD. 10TH FLOOR DORI CONTRERAS CORPUS CHRISTIJTEXAS 78401 36138$0416 (IEL) JUSTICES 361 388-0794 (FAX) GINA M. BENAVIDES L NORA L.LONGORIA HIDALGO coum'x LETICIA HINOJOSA COURTHOUSE ANNEX m AIME T ER N JcLARlssUA31h; @flufi 0t mpealfi 100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR EDINBURG. TEXAS 78539 956-318-2405 (TEL) CLE§¥HY s. MILLS mifieemh Eight,“ 0f mzxag 956'318'2403 (FAX) wwwl Ixcourfs. gov/f 3rhcoa August 11, 2022 Hon. J. Michael Moore Hon. David M. Diaz Moore Law Firm Jones, Davis & Jackson, P.C. 4900 North 10th SL, Suite F-3 151 10 Dallas Parkway, Ste. 300 McAllen, TX 78504 Dallas, TX 75248 * * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL "' DELIVERED VlA E—MAlfififi-‘ED Pablo Gama m g0 01cm CKWM Hon. m, _' Garza & Gonzales, P.L.L.C. t '- 621 s. 10th Ave. AUG ll 2022 Edinburg ’ TX 78539-4422 t t LAURA ' ‘1" CLERK DELIVERED VlA E—MAIL L Wick also county Re: Cause No. 13-22-00272-cv BY A . DeputyfiM Tr.Ct.No. C—1392—21-B : Style: G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C. v. Walid Haidar, and as representative of 415 Trenton, L.L.C. d/b/a Walk-On's ports Bistreaux, and Mousse Haider. Individually, and as representative of 15 Trenton, L.L.C. dlb/a Walk-On's Sports Bistreaux Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date. Very truly yours. Kathy S. Mills, Clerk Enc. cc: 93rd District Court/Hidalgo County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) Hon. Laura Hinojosa, District Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) Hon. Missy Medary, Presiding Judge, Fifth Administrative Judicial Region (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) EN’CLQ EM 95mm Courtsflo County 35‘ ’ I Deputym THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 13-22-00272—CV I G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C. ' v. Walid Haidar Individually, and as representative of 415 Trenton, L. L. C.d/b/a Walk- On's Sports Bistreaux and Mousse Haider Individually, and as representative of415 Trenton L. L. C d/b/a Walk- On‘ s Sports Bistreaux On Appeal from the l 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas I Trial Court Cause No. C-1392-21-B I JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cau'se on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the :éppeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. . | We further order this decision certified below for observance. August 11. 2022 Mflgfg M NUMBER 13-22-00272-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS ;i CORPUS CHRISTI — EDINBURG i‘ G&G CLOSED CIRCUIT EVENTS, L.L.C., Appellant, v. WALID HAIDAR, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF 415 TRENTON, L.L.C. | D/B/A WALK-ON’S SPORTS BISTREAUX, AND I MOUSSA HAIDER, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS ." REPRESENTATIVE OF 41 5 TRENTON, L.L.C. ! DIBIA WALK-ON’S SPORTS BISTREAUX, Appellees. On appeal from the 93rd District Court I: of Hidalgo County, Texas. - MEMORANDUM OPINION | Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijer-ina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria Appellant G&G Closed Circuit Events, L.L.C. (G&G) filed a notice of appeal on June 14, 2022, and an amended notice of appeal on June 15, 2022, regarding a default | i judgment that had been rendered against it. The documents originaily provideq with I. appellant’s notice of appeal indicated that the notice of appeal had not been timely? filed. Accordingly, on June 15, 2022, the Clerk of this Court advised appellant that the éppeal had not been timely perfected. The Clerk directed appellant to correct this deflect, if possible, and advised appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect w:as not cured within ten days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(8). Appellant did not respond to the (Elerk’s notice regarding the timeliness ofthe appeal. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c). g The Court has now received and reviewed the clerk’s record and a supplemental clerk’s record. Based on our review, appellant's notice of appeal was timely. bith the default iudgment at issue was interlocutory in nature. As shown by the clerk’s rfecord, Walid Haidar, individually, and as representative of 415 Trenton, L.L.C. d/b/a Wallk-On’s Sports Bistreaux (plaintiffs), filed suit against G&G on grounds that G&G failed to provide Closed circuit sporting events as promised by contract. These plaintiffs subseqhently sought a defautt judgment against G&G on grounds that G&G had been served witp their lawsuit but failed to appear in the proceedings or file an answer. On July 20, 202l1, the I' trialcourt entered a default judgment against G&G. On August 19, 2021, G&G filed a motion for new trial seeking to set asifcje the default judgment. On September 28, 2021, the trial court granted G&G's motion fidr new trial and set aside the default judgment. On October 19, 2021, G&G filed its Sriginal answer, and on October 20, 2021, G&G filed a counterclaim and third-party fietition | >- against Walid Haidar. 415 Trenton, L.L.C., and Mousse Haidar, individually and!:d/b/a Walk-On‘s Sports Bistreaux and Bar. On November 18, 2021. the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the trial court's September 28, 2021 order setting aside the default judgment. On December 27, 2021, the plaintiffs and third-party counter—defendant Mousse filed their original a:nswer in “Plaintiff/Counter Defendant and Third—Party Counter Defendant Original Answér and General Denial." On December 29, 2021, Mousse filed a “First Amended Original AAswer, General Denial, and Affirmative Defenses." On February 28, 2022, the trial court éigned an "Order Granting Plaintiff‘s [sic] Motion for Reconsideration." This order granits the plaintifis’ motion for reconsideration, reinstates the default judgment of July 20, 202.11, and vacates the September 28, 2021 order granting a new trial. {I An appellate court has “an obligation to examine [its] jurisdiction any time litis in doubt . .. .” Pike v. Tex. EMC Mgmt, LLC, 61 O S.W.3d 763, 774 (Tex. 2020). As a general rule, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har—Con Coirpu 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). “Exceptions t0 this general rule are provided by séétfites that specifically authorize interlocutory appeals of particular orders." City of Watéuga v. Gordon, 434 S.W.3d 586, 588 (Tex. 2014); see, e.g., TEX. Clv. PRAC. & REM. COD!|E ANN. § 51 .014 (listing several interlocutory orders that may be appealed). i The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file alind the applicable law, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Based ion the record, G&G has pending counterclaims and third-party claims which have noli been resolved. There is no final judgment, and the record fails to indicate that a I'statule | authorizes an interlocutory appeal. See City of Watauga, 434 S.W.3d at 588; Leh'mann, 39 S.W.3d at 195. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack ofjurisdiction. See IEX. R. L APP. P. 42.3(3). i NORA L. LONGORIA Jusfice Delivered and filed on the 11th day of August, 2022.