WILLIAM LUND, SCOTT FRENCH, PALMS MUSTANG ISLAND, LP. AND WILLIAM LUND, L.L.C. v. PALMS AT WATERS EDGE, LTD., TRAVIC INC., WYLIE A. EATON, AND MARY LOU EATON--Appeal from County Court at Law No 1 of Nueces County

NUMBER 13-03-443-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

WILLIAM LUND, SCOTT FRENCH,

PALMS MUSTANG ISLAND, LP.

AND WILLIAM LUND, L.L.C. Appellants,

v.

PALMS AT WATERS EDGE, LTD.,

TRAVIC INC., WYLIE A. EATON,

AND MARY LOU EATON, Appellees.

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Ya ez

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

This is an appeal from a no-evidence summary judgment. Appellees, The Palms at Waters Edge, Ltd., Travic, Inc., Wylie Eaton, and Mary Louise Eaton, have filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. We grant this motion and dismiss the appeal.

We have no jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a judgment that is not final. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A judgment is final if it disposes of all pending parties and claims in the record. Guajardo v. Conwell, 46 S.W.3d 862, 863-64 (Tex. 2001) (per curiam). In cases in which only one final and appealable judgment can be rendered, a judgment issued without a conventional trial is final for purposes of appeal if and only if either it actually disposes of all claims and parties then before the court, regardless of its language, or it states with unmistakable clarity that it is a final judgment. Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 204; Parks v. Dewitt County Elec. Coop., Inc., 112 S.W.3d 157, 161 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.).

According to appellees, the judgment at issue does not address appellees counterclaims against appellants, William Lund, Scott French, Palms Mustang Island, L.P., and William Lund, L.L.C. Further, according to appellants, the judgment at issue does not address all of appellants causes of action against appellees.

The resolution of these issues requires more than the disposition of perfunctory issues that can be procedurally cured by the trial court entering a clarifying order. See Garcia v. Commissioners Court of Cameron County, 101 S.W.3d 778, 786 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.). Accordingly, we grant appellees motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum opinion delivered and filed

this 28th day of April, 2005.