Jane Doe, John Doe, and All Other Occupants of 935 Silver Streak Drive Saginaw, TX 76131 v. AMH 2014-3 Borrower, LLC Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 of Tarrant County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-19-00424-CV ___________________________ JANE DOE, JOHN DOE, AND ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF 935 SILVER STREAK DRIVE SAGINAW, TX 76131, Appellants V. AMH 2014-3 BORROWER, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 2019-008383-1 Before Sudderth, C.J.; Gabriel and Kerr, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth MEMORANDUM OPINION On November 19, 2019, Appellants Jane Doe, John Doe, and “All Other Occupants of 935 Silver Streak Drive, Saginaw, TX 76131” appealed the trial court’s judgment for possession of the premises. On March 18, 2020, we warned Appellants that their brief was late and that we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution if they did not file their brief by March 30, 2020, along with a motion reasonably explaining the failure to timely file their brief and their need for an extension. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 38.6(a), 38.8(a)(1). Appellants have not responded.1 Accordingly, we dismiss their appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). /s/ Bonnie Sudderth Bonnie Sudderth Chief Justice Delivered: May 7, 2020 Additionally, because Appellants lost possession of the premises after a writ of possession was executed on January 21, 2020, their appeal appears to have become moot. See Ratliff v. Homes by Ashley, Inc., No. 02-20-00014-CV, 2020 WL 1057320, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 5, 2020, no pet. h.) (mem. op.) (explaining that the only issue in a forcible-detainer action is the right to actual possession of the property and that such an appeal becomes moot upon eviction unless the appellant holds and asserts a meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession or unless damages or attorney’s fees remain at issue). 1 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.
