Court Opinion

ID: 9403436
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 06:10:03.186011+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:06.973211
License: Public Domain

DISMISS and Opinion Filed June 13, 2023

                                  S   In The
                            Court of Appeals
                     Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                              No. 05-22-01233-CV

                 AKINO BRUMFIELD, Appellant
                              V.
       LANDCARE USA L.L.C. & NAMBO GUADLUAPE, Appellees

               On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court
                            Dallas County, Texas
                    Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-11764

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before Justices Molberg, Carlyle, and Smith
                            Opinion by Justice Smith
      We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal from the trial court’s summary

judgment as the judgment appeared to have been signed outside the trial court’s

plenary power, making the judgment void.        See Freedom Commc’ns, Inc. v.

Coronado, 372 S.W.3d 621, 623 (Tex. 2012) (per curiam) (appellate courts lack

jurisdiction to address merits of appeal from void judgment); Pipes v. Hemingway,

358 S.W.3d 438, 445 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.) (action taken by trial court

outside plenary power is void). As reflected in the clerk’s record, the underlying

cause was initially dismissed for want of prosecution on October 11, 2021. A motion
to reinstate was timely filed, and the motion was granted on December 6, 2021. See

TEX. R. CIV. P. 165a3 (providing that motion to reinstate must be filed within thirty

days of dismissal order). The trial court then signed the appealed summary judgment

on October 14, 2022.

      Although a timely filed motion to reinstate extends a trial court’s plenary

power over a case to seventy-five days from the date of judgment, the motion must

be verified. See id.; McConnell v. May, 800 S.W.2d 194, 194 (Tex. 1990) (orig.

proceeding) (per curiam). The motion here, however, was unverified, resulting in

the trial court’s plenary power over the underlying case expiring November 12, 2021

and the appealed summary judgment being void. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 4, 329b(d);

Pipes, 358 S.W.3d at 445.

      We informed the parties by letter that when an appeal is taken from a void

judgment, we have jurisdiction only to vacate the judgment and dismiss the appeal.

See In re M.K., 514 S.W3d at 369, 390 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2017, no pet.).

Although we gave the parties an opportunity to show cause why the appeal should

be retained, more than ten days have passed, and the parties have not done so.

Accordingly, on the record before us, we vacate the October 2022 summary

judgment and dismiss the appeal. See id.

                                           /Craig Smith/
                                           CRAIG SMITH
221233F.P05                                JUSTICE

                                        –2–
                                 S
                           Court of Appeals
                    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 JUDGMENT

AKINO BRUMFIELD, Appellant                 On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial
                                           District Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-22-01233-CV         V.              Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-11764.
                                           Opinion delivered by Justice Smith,
LANDCARE USA L.L.C. &                      Justices Molberg and Carlyle
NAMBO GUADALUPE, Appellees                 participating.

      In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial
court’s October 14, 2022 summary judgment and DISMISS the appeal.

      We ORDER that appellees Landcare USA L.L.C. & Nambo Guadalupe
recover their costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant Akino Brumfield.

Judgment entered June 13, 2023

                                     –3–