Court Opinion

ID: 9370329
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-13 07:08:13.222332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:21.108326
License: Public Domain

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
                            FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

                                              ORDER

Appellate case name:      Fuel 2 Go, LLC, and D&R USA Enterprises, Inc. v. Mesa Fortune,
                          Inc., d/b/a Mesa Food Mart Inc. and SCF RC Funding IV LLC

Appellate case number:    01-21-00546-CV

Trial court case number: 2021-51843

Trial court:              270th District Court of Harris County

        This is an accelerated appeal from an order granting the application by Mesa Fortune, Inc.
d/b/a Mesa Food Mart for a temporary injunction. The order granting the temporary injunction
states that “there is a dispute regarding ownership and regarding who has the authority to receive
rents under the lease and to exercise the terms of the Lease Agreement” and “a dispute as to who
has the authority to issue and/or enter into any new lease agreements or to lease the property.” The
order returns the parties to the last peaceable status quo with Mesa as tenant and orders other
defendants, aside from SCF RC Funding, Inc., to vacate the premises and orders that these other
defendants are not entitled to possession or to lease the premises “until there is a further
determination of ownership by this court or by the 152nd District Court.” The trial court ordered
Mesa to pay rental payments into the registry of the court.
         On July 20, 2022, the trial court signed an order granting SCF’s traditional motion for
partial summary judgment determining that SCF was the owner of the property and that defendant
D & R USA, Inc. was not the legal or equitable owner of the property. The trial court subsequently
granted SCF’s motion to disburse rent payments from the registry of the court.
        Because the trial court has determined ownership of the property and has disbursed the
rental payments, this Court is considering whether the appeal of the temporary injunction order
may be moot. An appellate court “cannot decide a case that has become moot during the pendency
of the appeal.” Coburn v. Moreland, 433 S.W.3d 809, 825 (Tex. App.—Austin 2014, no pet.).
“An appeal is moot when a court’s action on the merits cannot affect the rights of the parties.”
Zipp v. Wuemling, 218 S.W.3d 71, 73 (Tex. 2007).
       Accordingly, the Court asks that both parties file a response to this order within 10 days
from the date of this order addressing by argument and citation to authority whether this appeal
is moot.
       It is so ORDERED.
Judge’s signature: ______/s/ Richard Hightower_____
                    Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___February 9, 2023____