Dismissed and Opinion Filed October 5 , 2015 .

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 00913 - CV JEFF SILL AND NEWPOR T CONSTRUCTION SERVI CES, INC. , Appellants V. LYNN FORNER F/K/A LY NN BEALL , Appellee On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366 - 02253 - 2014 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang

- Miers, and Justice Stoddart

Opini on by Justice Stoddart Pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014 and Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 28.3, Jeff Sill and Newport Construction Services, Inc. have filed a petition for permissive interlocutory appeal
. See T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(d) ,(f) (West 20 15 ); T EX . R. A PP . P. 28.3. We may accept an interlocutory appeal if (1) the order being appealed involves a controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of op inion, and (2) an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation. See T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(d),(f) (West 2015)
. A “controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion” has been explained as follows:– 2

–

[A] controlling question of law is one that deeply affects the ongoing process of litigation. If resolution of the questi on will considerably shorten the time, effort, and expense of fully litigating the case, the question is controlling. Generally, if the viability of a claim rests upon the court’s determination of a question of law, the question is controlling . . .. Sub stantial grounds for disagreement exist when the question presented to the court is novel or difficult, when controlling circuit law is doubtful, when controlling circuit law is in disagreement with other courts of appeals, and where there simply is little authority upon which the district court can rely. . .. Generally, a district court will make [a finding that the appeal will facilitate final resolution of the case] when resolution of the legal question dramatically affects recovery in a lawsuit. ADT S ec . Servs
. , Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers , 05

- 15

- 00646

- CV, 2015 WL 4554519 *2 (Tex. App.

— Dallas July 29, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (quoting Gulf Coast Asphalt Co. v. Lloyd , 457 S.W.3d 539, 543

- 44 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, no pet.)). The or der appellants seek permission to appeal deni es their motion for partial summary judgment on their claim that a default judgment entered against them was void for lack of service
. T he order further identifie s th ree legal questions which t he trial court co ncluded would immediately end the dispute between the parties , Those questions concern service of process and are well

- settled
. Well

- settled questions are not proper for a permissive appeal because they

ar e not subject to “a substantial ground for differ ence of opinion
. ” See T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(d),(f); A DT , 2015 WL 4554519 *2. Accordingly, w e d eny the petition and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . § 51.014(f); T EX . R. A PP . P. 28.3(j) , 43.2(f).

150913F.P05
/Craig Stoddart/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
JEFF SILL AND NEWPORT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., Appellants No. 05

- 15

- 00913

- CV V. LYNN FORNER F/K/A LYNN BEALL, Appellee On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366

- 02253

- 2014. Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart. Chief Justice Wright and Justice Lang

- Miers participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. We ORDER that appellee Lynn Forner f/k/a Lynn Beall recover her costs, if any, of this appeal from appellants Jeff Sill and Newport Construction Services, Inc. Judgment entered this 5th day of October, 2015.