Court Opinion

ID: 9778506
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 21:10:16.354166+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:33:10.779996
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
The State has filed a motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction and a motion for rehearing. We overrule both motions.
The State raises a new point of error in its motion for rehearing. It asserts that the judgment of the trial court is interlocutory and not appealable because it failed to dispose of all parties in the cause.
The State never served notice of its objections to the commissioners’ award on the Ellisons, First National Bank, or Garrett Engineering. Therefore, the trial court never had in personam jurisdiction over any of the defendants in the judicial proceeding. The trial court’s order of dismissal, based on the absence of such in person-am jurisdiction and the failure of the State to serve its objections on the defendants within a reasonable time, acted to dismiss the whole case against all parties. See Denton County v. Brammer, 361 S.W.2d 198, 200-201 (Tex.1962); Deanne v. Deanne, 689 S.W.2d 262, 263 (Tex.App.-Waco 1985, no writ); Texas Resources, Inc. v. Diamond Shamrock Corp., 584 S.W.2d 522, 524-25 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1979, no writ).
Accordingly, the State’s motion to dismiss and motion for rehearing are overruled.