Sammie Harrison v. Dallas Area Habitat for Humanities

VACATE and DISMISS; and Opinion Filed April 25, 2016.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-00057-CV
SAMMIE HARRISON, Appellant
V.
DALLAS AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITIES, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-06513-B
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart
Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers
Appellant appeals the January 20, 2016 de novo judgment rendered by the county court at
law in this forcible detainer case. Upon review of the clerk’s record, it appeared that appellant’s
appeal bond was not timely filed in the justice court. By letter dated March 7, 2016, we notified
the parties that it appeared the county court at law lacked jurisdiction over the appeal from the
justice court. We requested briefing on the issue from the parties. To date, we have received no
response.
A party may appeal a judgment in an eviction case by filing a bond, making a cash
deposit, or filing a sworn statement of inability to pay with the justice court within five days after
the judgment is signed. TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.9(a). An appeal of a justice court's ruling is perfected
when a bond, cash deposit, or statement of inability to pay is filed in accordance with this rule.
TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.9(f). The justice court signed its judgment on December 14, 2015 awarding
appellee possession of the property. Appellant filed an appeal bond on December 28, 2015.
Because appellant did not timely file an appeal bond or statement of inability to pay in
accordance with rule 510.9(a) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, appellant did not properly
perfect an appeal to the county court. As a result, the county court at law had no jurisdiction to
hear the de novo appeal. See Williams v. Schneiber, 148 S.W.3d 581, 583 (Tex. App.—Fort
Worth 2004, no pet.). Because appeal from the justice court judgment was not timely perfected
and the county court never acquired jurisdiction, the judgment of the justice court was never
vacated. Cf. Villalon v. Bank One, 176 S.W.3d 66, 69–70 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004,
pet. denied) (“[I]t is well-settled that perfection of an appeal to county court from a justice court
for trial de novo vacates and annuls the judgment of the justice court.”).
When a trial court does not have jurisdiction to render a judgment, the proper practice is
for the reviewing court to set the judgment aside and dismiss the cause. Dallas County Appraisal
Dist. v. Funds Recovery, Inc., 887 S.W.2d 465, 468 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994, writ denied).
Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of County Court at Law No. 2 and dismiss the case. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(e).
/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/
ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS
JUSTICE
160057F.P05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
SAMMIE HARRISON, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at Law
No. 2, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00057-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-06513-B.
Opinion delivered by Justice Lang-Miers.
DALLAS AREA HABITAT FOR Chief Justice Wright and Justice Stoddart
HUMANITIES, Appellee participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the judgment of
County Court at Law No. 2 and DISMISS the case.
It is ORDERED that appellee DALLAS AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITIES recover
its costs of this appeal from appellant SAMMIE HARRISON.
Judgment entered this 25th day of April, 2016.
–3–