Caroline Buswell v. The GWSPI Company, LLC, as Successor in Interest to Wilmington Trust, NA, Trustee of the Jeffrey P. Blanchard 2013 Family Trust Appeal from 224th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas DISSENTING OPINION No. 04-15-00398-CV Caroline BUSWELL, Appellant v. The GWSPI Company, LLC, as Successor in Interest to Wilmington Trust, NA, Trustee of the d THE GWSPI COMPANY, LLC, as Successor in Interest to Wilmington Trust, NA, Trustee of the Jeffrey P. Blanchard 2013 Family Trust, Appellee From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015-CI-06197 Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding DISSENT TO ORDER GRANTING APPELLANT’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY Dissenting Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 10, 2015 I dissent to the panel’s granting of appellant’s Emergency Motion to Stay, which stayed all further proceedings, including discovery, at the trial court level. An interlocutory appeal is available only in limited circumstances. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a) (West 2015). Section 51.014 provides that an interlocutory appeal may be brought after the denial of a special appearance, but the statute does not provide a stay of anything but the trial pending resolution of the appeal. See id. § 51.014(a)(7), (b). Appellant relies on Oryx Capital Int’l, Inc. v. Sage Apartments, L.L.C., 167 S.W.3d 432, 437 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2005, no pet.), in an Dissenting Opinion 04-15-00398-CV attempt to work around subsection 51.014(b), but that reliance is misplaced because Oryx contained circumstances not present in the case before us. Therefore, I do not believe circumstances exist that would support this court imposing a stay beyond that expressly authorized by subsection 51.014(b). Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice -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.
