Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
On July 11, 2011, we received a response from Appellant. That same day, we sent another letter to Appellant expressing our concern that any complaint regarding the temporary guardian is now moot because the case has been dismissed. See, e.g., Hamilton County v. Cooper, No. 05–07–00307–CV, 2007 WL 2774166, at *1 (Tex.App.—Dallas Sept. 25, 2007, no pet.) (dismissing an appeal from a temporary injunction as moot after trial court rendered a final judgment in the case). We notified Appellant that we would dismiss this case for want of jurisdiction unless Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court within ten days a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. On July 22, 2011, we received a response from Appellant. However, Appellant's response does not show grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant complains of various acts by the temporary guardian ad litem regarding the estate of Appellant's father, and he argues that these acts constitute a continuing controversy between the parties. Any such controversy between the parties does not, however, flow from the propriety of the temporary guardian's appointment. Further, Appellant does not explain how a judgment from this court could remedy what harm Appellant claims to suffer. See IN RE: Smith, No. 05–09–00913–CV, 2010 WL 4324434, at *2 (Tex.App.—Dallas Nov. 3, 2010, orig. proceeding) (mem.op.). We therefore dismiss this appeal as moot. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J.
DELIVERED: August 18, 2011
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: NO. 02–11–00219–CV
Decided: August 23, 2011
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)