Dan Simmons Simmons & Associates of North Texas, P.L.L.C DS Family, LP Financial Worx, Ltd. And Sekure Connekt, Ltd. v. Richard Wylie, Individually KSW CPA, P.C. Fka Simmons & Wylie, P.C. And HMSW CPA, P.L.L.C. ( 2019 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-18-00166-CV
___________________________
DAN SIMMONS; SIMMONS & ASSOCIATES OF NORTH TEXAS, P.L.L.C;
DS FAMILY, LP; FINANCIAL WORX, LTD.; AND SEKURE CONNEKT, LTD.,
Appellants
V.
RICHARD WYLIE, INDIVIDUALLY; KSW CPA, P.C. FKA SIMMONS &
WYLIE, P.C.; AND HMSW CPA, P.L.L.C., Appellees
On Appeal from the 141st District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 141-255831-11
Before Gabriel, Kerr, and Bassel, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Gabriel
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellants Dan Simmons; Simmons & Associates of North Texas, P.L.L.C.;
DS Family, LP; Financial Worx, Ltd.; and Sekure Connekt, Ltd. brought this
interlocutory appeal challenging the trial court’s temporary injunction enjoining Dan
Simmons from providing public accounting services, whether personally or through
any other entity or individual professionally associated with him, to certain clients. See
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(4). After the parties filed their briefs,
we received a suggestion of bankruptcy, which resulted in this appeal being suspended
and administratively closed. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.2. We subsequently reinstated this
appeal after appellants filed a motion for reinstatement apprising us that the
bankruptcy court had modified the automatic bankruptcy stay to allow this appeal to
proceed. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.3(a).
This court has now been apprised that the trial court has rendered a final
judgment in the underlying cause. Among other things, the final judgment orders that
“[a]ny injunctive relief previously granted is terminated.” Concerned that the trial
court’s final judgment rendered this appeal moot, we notified the parties by letter
dated July 11, 2019, informing them of our concern and requesting them to file a
response by July 22, 2019, showing grounds for continuing this appeal. We stated
that if we did not receive a response by that time, this appeal could be dismissed for
want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. No parties filed a response.
2
It is well-settled that a temporary injunction expires upon the rendition of a
final judgment. See Jordan v. Landry’s Seafood Rest., Inc., 89 S.W.3d 737, 741 (Tex.
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. denied) (op. on reh’g). A final judgment thus
renders an interlocutory appeal from a temporary injunction moot. See id.
Accordingly, because the trial court’s final judgment in the underlying cause has
rendered moot appellants’ appeal from the temporary injunction, we dismiss this
appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3; Jordan, 89 S.W.3d at
741.
/s/ Lee Gabriel
Lee Gabriel
Justice
Delivered: August 8, 2019
3