Michelle Adame v. Arturo Diaz ( 2021 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-21-00080-CV
Michelle ADAME,
Appellant
v.
Arturo DIAZ,
Appellee
From the County Court at Law No. 5, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2020CV04024
Honorable John Longoria, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 5, 2021
DISMISSED AS MOOT
This is an appeal in a forcible detainer action in which the county court signed a judgment of
possession in favor of appellee on February 5, 2021. A review of the clerk’s record shows the county
clerk issued a writ of possession seeking to enforce that judgment on February 10, 2021.
The only issue in a forcible detainer action is the right to actual possession of the property. See
TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.3(e); Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of the City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 785
(Tex. 2006); see also TEX. PROP. CODE §§ 24.001-.002. A judgment of possession in such an action
determines only the right to immediate possession and is not a final determination of whether an
04-21-00080-CV
eviction is wrongful. Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 787. When a forcible detainer defendant fails to file a
supersedeas bond in the amount set by the county court, the judgment may be enforced and a writ of
possession may be executed, evicting the defendant from the property. See TEX. PROP. CODE § 24.007;
TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.13; Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 786. If a forcible detainer defendant fails to supersede
the judgment and loses possession of the property, the appeal is moot unless she (1) timely and clearly
expressed her intent to appeal and (2) asserted “a potentially meritorious claim of right to current,
actual possession of the [property].” See Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 786-87.
The clerk’s record does not indicate appellant filed a supersedeas bond and it is unclear whether
the writ of possession was executed. On March 9, 2021, we ordered appellant to file a written response
no later than March 19, 2021 explaining whether the writ of possession was executed and why this
appeal should not be dismissed as moot. Appellant did not respond. Accordingly, we dismiss this
appeal as moot.
PER CURIAM
-2-