Valero Refinery-Texas, LP v. Reannah Vela Appeal from 347th District Court of Nueces County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-21-00218-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG VALERO REFINERY – TEXAS LP, Appellant, v. REANNAH VELA, Appellee. On appeal from the 347th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Longoria, Hinojosa, and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa Appellant Valero Refinery – Texas, LP (Valero) has filed a petition for permissive interlocutory appeal seeking to challenge the trial court’s order denying Valero’s motion for summary judgment which sought to dismiss appellee Reanna Vela’s suit against Valero. Vela has filed a response to the petition. Generally, an order that does not dispose of all claims and all parties is interlocutory and is not an appealable order. Sabre Travel Int’l, Ltd. v. Deutsche Lufthansa AG, 567 S.W.3d 725, 730 (Tex. 2019). To be entitled to a permissive appeal from an interlocutory order that is not otherwise appealable, the requesting party must establish to the trial court that (1) the order “involves a controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion” and (2) allowing an immediate appeal “may advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(d); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 28.3. If the trial court grants permission to appeal, as here, we may accept the appeal if the appeal is warranted under the foregoing criteria. TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(f); see Sabre, 567 S.W.3d at 732 (“Texas courts of appeals have discretion to accept or deny permissive interlocutory appeals certified under section 51.014(d). . . .”). Having reviewed Valero’s petition, the record documents attached thereto, and Vela’s response, this Court is of the opinion that Valero has not shown its entitlement to permissive interlocutory appeal. Accordingly, we deny the petition for permissive interlocutory appeal, and we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We further dismiss all pending motions as moot. LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice Delivered and filed on the 5th day of August, 2021. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
