Liudmila Nevarez v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company — Order

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
————————————
No. 08-26-00296-CV
————————————
Liudmila Nevarez, Appellant
v.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 3
El Paso County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2025DCV5128
ORDER
Appellant, Liudmila Nevarez, appeals from the trial court’s July 30, 2026 summary
judgment order in favor of Appellee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State
Farm). That order explicitly stated that it disposed of all pending claims against State Farm and
was a final, appealable judgment. However, the order also expressly stated that it did “not affect
or extend to the claims asserted by Plaintiff against Isaac Salas, which remain active and pending.”

In light of the pending claims against Salas, this Court issued a notice to Nevarez that the
challenged order was not a final, appealable order, and this Court lacked jurisdiction over her
appeal. See McFadin v. Broadway Coffeehouse, LLC, 539 S.W.3d 278, 283 (Tex. 2018) (“A
judgment is final for purposes of appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims.”) (citing
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001)). We further advised Nevarez that
her appeal might be dismissed unless she filed a response showing why the Court has jurisdiction.
See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
In response, Nevarez filed a motion to abate in which she acknowledges that the order at
issue is not final but asks that we abate the appeal and remand to the trial court to sever.
We GRANT the motion in part and we ABATE this appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 27.2 (“The
appellate court may allow an appealed order that is not final to be modified so as to be made final
and may allow the modified order and all proceedings relating to it to be included in a supplemental
record.”); see Wiley v. Carmean, No. 03-10-00806-CV, 2011 WL 2768717, at *1 (Tex. App.—
Austin 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (abating to allow the appellant to cure the jurisdictional defect)).
We ORDER Nevarez to take action to cure the jurisdictional defect and to provide this
Court with a supplemental clerk’s record showing that the trial court’s order has become final or
that a final judgment exists. If no supplemental clerk’s record showing that this Court has
jurisdiction is filed by November 18, 2026, this appeal may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). All other requested relief is DENIED. The appeal will be reinstated upon
further order of this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of October 2026.
MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice