CourtListener 9501383•Tara Cameron and Jeremy Cameron, Individually, and as Next Friend of G.C., a Minor v. Striker Infusion Services, LLC
Tara Cameron and Jeremy Cameron, Individually, and as Next Friend of G.C., a Minor v. Striker Infusion Services, LLC
CourtListener 9501383Txctapp14May 7, 2024
Full text
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 7,
2024.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-23-00921-CV
TARA CAMERON AND JEREMY CAMERON, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS
NEXT FRIEND OF G.C., A MINOR, Appellants
V.
STRIKER INFUSION SERVICES, LLC, Appellee
On Appeal from the 268th District Court
Fort Bend County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 23-DCV-302654
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from a judgment signed on November 14, 2023. On
November 20, 2023, appellants filed in the trial court a motion to vacate the
judgment. On December 6, 2023, appellants filed their notice of appeal. On
February 22, 2024, this court sent a notice of dismissal for want of jurisdiction
unless any party filed a response showing meritorious grounds for continuing the
appeal. The same day, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal pursuant to
Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a). Appellants’ motion states that this appeal is moot because
on November 27, 2023, the trial court vacated the judgment that was the subject of
this appeal.
The mootness doctrine limits courts to deciding cases in which an actual
controversy exists. See F.D.I.C. v. Nueces Cnty., 886 S.W.2d 766, 767 (Tex. 1994).
An issue becomes moot when (1) it appears that one seeks to obtain a judgment on
some controversy, which in reality does not exist or (2) when one seeks a judgment
on some matter which, when rendered for any reason, cannot have any practical
legal effect on a then-existing controversy. Alsobrook v. MTGLQ Invs., LP, 657
S.W.3d 327, 330 (Tex. App. — Dallas 2021), aff'd as modified, 656 S.W.3d 394
(Tex. 2022). A case becomes moot if there ceases to be a justiciable controversy
between the parties, such as when “the issues presented are no longer ‘live.’”
Heckman v. Williamson Cty., 369 S.W.3d 137, 162 (Tex. 2012).
Accordingly, we grant appellants’ motion to dismiss.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Poissant.
2
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.