Court Opinion

ID: 9776280
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:29:25.104671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:36.506126
License: Public Domain

ASHWORTH, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree with the majority opinion that Liberty did not make a general appearance and that the case must be remanded for a hearing on its special appearance. However, the opinion should stop at that point. We should not now attempt to address the remaining points of error. In doing so, the majority in effect have rendered an advisory opinion. The case should be put back in the posture which existed when the question of jurisdiction over Liberty needed to be decided.
A decision by the trial court, after hearing, that it has jurisdiction over Liberty, will require a new trial on the merits. This will result in a duplication of effort on the part of the trial court, attorneys and parties. However, the status of this case requires a new trial in the event the trial court finds it has jurisdiction. There is no way now to determine what effect the trial court’s finding of jurisdiction had on the prior trial on the merits.
I would reverse and remand to the trial court for a hearing on the special appearance and for such further procedures as would be consistent with the trial court’s ruling on jurisdiction.