Source: http://texas-opinions.com/08-Villafani-MD-v-Trejo-Tex-2008-by-Wainwright-HCLC-appellate-jurisdiction-to-review-denial-of-sanctions-after-nonsuit.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 16:21:49+00:00

Document:
remand to the court of appeals for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Majority opinion below: Villafani v. Trejo, No. (13-04-00449-CV (Tex.App. - Corpus Christi [13th Dist.] Oct.
order because it was rendered moot by the trial court's subsequent dismissal of the case. See FDIC v.
surgery. Trejo filed timely expert reports as required by section 13.01(d) of the MLIIA. See Tex. Rev.
dismissal, claiming that the expert report did not satisfy statutory requirements. See id. § 13.01(e).
court of appeals’ determination of its jurisdiction de novo. McAllen Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Cortez, 66 S.W.
3d 227, 231 (Tex. 2001).
Inc. v. Rubio, 185 S.W.3d 842, 846 (Tex. 2005).
relationship between that failure and the injury, harm, or damages claimed. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. art.
filing a claim or, if not provided, to voluntarily nonsuit the claim against the defendant. Tex. Rev. Civ.
necessary to pay that award; and (3) dismissal of the case with prejudice. Id. § 13.01(e).
Civil Practice and Remedies Code).
dismissing counterclaims prevented appeal, as there was no final order, despite filing of nonsuit).
vitiate certain interlocutory orders, rendering them moot and unappealable. See Blackmon, 195 S.W.
by nonsuit and dismissing appeal as moot).
defendant’s counterclaim for costs and attorney’s fees. Klein v. Dooley, 949 S.W.2d 307, 307 (Tex.
longer subject to the plaintiff's right to nonsuit.”).
162 does not protect Villafani’s motion from the nullifying effect of the nonsuit.
made claims for affirmative relief.
parties but within the time period the trial court retained plenary jurisdiction. Scott & White Mem.
claims, even though those rulings were followed by a nonsuit of counterclaims by defendants. See, e.
g., Davidoff, 134 S.W.3d at 515 (abatement order); Atchison v. Weingarten Realty Mgmt. Co., 916 S.
claims against the plaintiff. See Tex. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ledbetter, __ S.W.3d __, __ (Tex. 2008).
pleadings after plaintiff nonsuited child custody dispute); Leon Springs Gas Co. v. Rest. Equip.
claims but is an affirmative claim where it is based on an independent ground or as a sanction.).
denial of his motion for sanctions and dismissal of Trejo’s claims.
MLIIA. Act of June 2, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 204, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 847 (current version at Tex. Civ.
ch. 140, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 985, amended by Act of June 1, 1997, 75th Leg., R.S., ch. 1228, 1997 Tex.
by Act of June 2, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 204, § 10.09, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 847, 884.
appeal after a final judgment. We need not address that issue in this case.

References: v. 
 v.

 § 13
 v. 
 v. 
 § 13
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 10