Court Opinion

ID: 3089889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 03:51:41.331099+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:41:12.273740
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-12-00772-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

GLORIA PEREZ,                                                                  Appellant,

                                            v.

BEEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY,                         Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the County Court at Law
                     of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
               Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes
                    Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Gloria Perez, appeals the trial court’s judgment of eviction entered

against appellant in a forcible detainer suit. On January 25, 2012, appellee filed a motion

to dismiss the appeal as moot, stating that appellant has voluntarily vacated the subject

property.

      “The only issue in an action for forcible detainer is the right to actual possession of
the premises, and the merits of title shall not be adjudicated.” Wilhelm v. Fannie Mae,

349 S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (citing Tex. R. Civ.

P. 746; Marshall v. Housing Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 785 (Tex.

2006)). Although the failure to supersede a forcible-detainer judgment does not divest a

defendant of his right to appeal when the defendant is no longer in possession of the

premises, an appeal from the judgment in that case is moot unless the defendant asserts

a “potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession.” Marshall, 198
S.W.3d at 787; Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 768.

      The Clerk of the Court requested a response from appellant.        Appellant has

responded that she has vacated the apartment and it is ready for inspection. Absent any

assertion of a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession, we

GRANT appellee’s motion and DISMISS the appeal as moot. See Marshall, 198 S.W.3d

at 787; Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 768.

                                               PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
14th day of February, 2013.

                                           2