Hoard Gainer Industry Co., Ltd v. A. John Knapp--Appeal from 133rd District Court of Harris County

Annotate this Case
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 8, 2005

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 8, 2005.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

_______________

NO. 14-04-01032-CV

_______________

HOARD GAINER INDUSTRY CO., LTD, Appellant

V.

A. JOHN KNAPP, Appellee

On Appeal from the 133rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 03-50732

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N


Hoard Gainer Industry Co., Ltd. (AHoard@) appeals a take-nothing summary judgment entered in favor of A. John Knapp on the ground that Knapp received a fraudulent transfer of property from Timothy J. Gollin, against whom Hoard had an unsatisfied judgment in a prior case. However, while this appeal was pending, the First Court of Appeals reversed Hoard=s judgment against Gollin in the prior case and rendered judgment that Hoard take nothing against Gollin; and the Texas Supreme Court denied Hoard=s petition for review of that decision.[1]

Because Hoard=s fraudulent transfer claim against Knapp in this case was asserted solely with regard to Hoard=s claim and judgment against Gollin in the prior case, and because that judgment has not only been reversed, but a take-nothing judgment entered in its place, it follows logically that that claim and judgment are no longer enforceable against Gollin=s assets, and that any transfer of Gollin=s assets cannot be fraudulent as to that claim or judgment. Therefore, there is no longer a live controversy whether the transfer at issue in this case was fraudulent with regard to Hoard=s claim or judgment against Gollin, and this appeal of the trial court=s determination of that issue is moot.[2] Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

/s/ Richard H. Edelman

Justice

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed September 8, 2005.

Panel consists of Justices Edelman, Hudson and Seymore.


[1] See Gollin v. Hoard Gainer Indus. Co., Ltd., No. 01 03 00435 CV, 2005 WL 110374 (Houston [1st Dist.] Jan 20, 2005, pet. denied).

[2] See Bd. of Adjustment of City of San Antonio v. Wende, 92 S.W.3d 424, 427 (Tex. 2002) (recognizing that a case becomes moot if a live controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the proceedings); Crown Life Ins. Co. v. Casteel, 22 S.W.3d 378, 391-92 (Tex. 2000) (holding that the issue of how much settlement credit the defendant was entitled to became moot when the judgment against the defendant was released).