Johnny Partain v. the Estate of James Harold Maples

NUMBER 13-14-00584-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
JOHNNY PARTAIN, Appellant,
v.
ESTATE OF JAMES H. MAPLES, Appellee.
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5
of Hidalgo County, Texas
ORDER
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Longoria
Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Johnny Partain, proceeding pro se, has appealed an order of the county
court dismissing his request for a temporary injunction in a forcible detainer action. It
appears that appellant attempted to intervene in a forcible detainer action appellee
brought against Dora Martinez in a justice-of-the-peace court. Appellant alleged that he
was the real owner of the property in question and that Martinez was his tenant.
Martinez defaulted, but appellant attempted to appeal to the county court and
moved for a temporary injunction. The trial court dismissed appellant’s motion.
Appellant has now filed an “Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to
Protect the Status Quo.” Appellant’s motion is in substance a request to stay
proceedings in the trial court during the pendency of the appeal. See Surgitek, Bristol-
Myers Corp. v. Abel, 997 S.W.2d 598, 601 (Tex. 1999) (observing that “we look to the
substance of a motion to determine the relief sought, not merely to its title”). We
requested that appellee file a response to appellant’s motion and granted appellee an
extension of time in which to do so, but no response has been filed to date.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for stay, including all
of the documents appellant attached to the motion, is of the opinion that appellant has
not shown that a stay is necessary to preserve his rights pending disposition of this
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 29.3. Accordingly, the motion for emergency stay is
DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
19th day of November, 2014.
2