Bessie L. Reddick v. CNMK Texas Properties ( 2014 )

DISMISS; and Opinion Filed June 23, 2014.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00509-CV
BESSIE L. REDDICK, Appellant
V.
CNMK TEXAS PROPERTIES, Appellee
On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-02402
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Brown
Opinion by Justice Brown
By letter dated May 28, 2014, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this
appeal. Specifically, the Court questioned whether the trial court rendered a final judgment
disposing of all the claims and all the parties in the case. Because the record before the Court
does not establish the existence of a final judgment disposing of all the claims and parties in the
case, we DISMISS the appeal.
This is a slip and fall case. Plaintiff filed suit against CNMK Properties, LLC alleging a
claim for negligence. The clerk’s record reflects that plaintiff and CNMK reached settlement,
plaintiff attempted to withdraw her consent to the settlement agreement and CNMK moved to
enforce the settlement agreement. While CNMK’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement
was pending, plaintiff’s counsel moved to withdraw on the ground that the plaintiff had
terminated his services. The trial court granted the motion of plaintiff’s counsel to withdraw.
The law firm then intervened in the suit seeking an award of judgment in the amount of the
contingency fees plaintiff had agreed to pay her counsel.
On March 31, 2014, the trial court granted CNMK’s motion to enforce the settlement
agreement. The trial court ordered CNMK to deposit $6,000 in the trial court’s registry and
further ordered that at the time this deposit was made to the trial court’s registry CNMK would
be “fully and completely discharged of their obligations to [the trial court] in connection with
this lawsuit” and that “the Court will determine the disbursement of the settlement funds; the
Court will enter a separate order reflecting this disbursement.” The record before the Court does
not reflect any further orders regarding the disposition of the funds in the trial court’s registry
and does not include any orders regarding the affirmative claims asserted by intervenor, Ben
Abbott, P.C., against appellant.
Generally, this Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments. See
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A final judgment is one that
disposes of all pending parties and claims. Id. In her jurisdictional brief to the Court, appellant
agrees that the “judgment appealed from cannot stand as a final judgment.” Appellant argues,
however, that the Court nonetheless has jurisdiction because “the Trial Court dismissed all the
parties except for Appellant.” Appellant also appears to argue that the trial court has severed all
of the parties from the case other than appellant. The record before the Court does not confirm
either that the trial court has dismissed all the parties from the case or that the trial court has
severed any of the claims in the case. 1 Indeed, on the record before the Court, the only
suggestion of any sort of finality with regard to any party in the case is the trial court’s order that
upon deposit of the settlement funds in the trial court’s registry, CNMK would be “fully and
1
In its letter requesting the parties to file jurisdictional briefing, the Court specifically advised appellant that if she wished to rely on matters
not in the record before the Court, she must obtain a supplemental clerk’s record from the trial court. She has not done so.
–2–
completely discharged of their obligations to [the trial court] in connection with this lawsuit.” 2
Because the record before the Court fails to reflect the existence of a final, appealable order
rendered by the trial court, the Court must conclude it lacks jurisdiction. Accordingly, we
DISMISS the appeal.
/Ada Brown/
ADA BROWN
JUSTICE
140509F.P05
2
The Court does not address at this time whether this language is sufficient to constitute a final judgment as between appellant and CNMK.
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
BESSIE L. REDDICK, Appellant On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-14-00509-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-02402.
Opinion delivered by Justice Brown.
CNMK TEXAS PROPERTIES, Appellee Justices Lang and Myers participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want
of jurisdiction.
It is ORDERED that appellee CNMK TEXAS PROPERTIES recover its costs of this
appeal from appellant BESSIE L. REDDICK.
Judgment entered this 23rd day of June, 2014.
/Ada Brown/
ADA BROWN
JUSTICE
–4–