Opinion
14-21-00612-CV
03-15-2022
P.K. SHAH, MD A/K/A PANKAJ K. SHAH INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF APEX LONG TERM ACUTE CARE-KATY, L.P. AND APEX KATY PHYSICIANS-TMG, LLC; PARAG PARIKH ON BEHALF OF LIFE SPACE, LLP, A LIMITED PARTNER OF APEX-TMC, L.P., MEDICAL CENTER SPECIALTY HOSPITAL, L.P., ACUITY HOSPITAL OF HOUSTON, L.P., AND MED CENTER WD, L.P.; AND APEX KATY PHYSICIANS, LLC, Appellants v. ROBERT D. REMY; STEPHEN KOCH, MD; AND ABEER SAQER AND I-CARE INTERNATIONAL, LLC., Appellees
On Appeal from the 129th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2016-20734
Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Bourliot and Spain.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
This is an attempted appeal from an order signed September 25, 2021. On 1
January 28, 2022, appellee, Robert D. Remy, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). The following day, appellee Stephen Koch filed a letter joining the motion. Because the September 25, 2021 order did not dispose of all pending claims, we grant appellees' motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). When orders do not dispose of all pending parties and claims, the orders remain interlocutory and unappealable until final judgment is rendered unless a statutory exception applies. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
In August 2021, appellees (1) Saqer and I-Care ("Saqer appellees"), (2) Remy, and (3) Koch each filed a motion for sanctions pursuant to Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 10.004 against appellants. See Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code § 10.004. On September 24, 2021, the Saqer appellees and appellants filed an agreed motion to dismiss the Saqer appellees' counterclaims and motion for sanctions with prejudice. On September 25, 2021, the trial court signed an agreed order of dismissal with prejudice, dismissing the Saquer appellees' claims, including the motion for sanctions. Appellants then filed their notice of appeal complaining of previously granted summary judgments in favor of all appellees.
Appellees, Remy and Koch, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal contending their outstanding motions for sanctions render the September 25, 2021 order interlocutory and unappealable. In response, appellants argue that a motion for sanctions does not constitute a claim that must be disposed before a judgment can be deemed final. This court has held, in a summary-judgment context, a request for a sanctions award under Chapter 10 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code must 2 be resolved for the trial court's judgment to be final and appealable. In re Wilma Reynolds, No. 14-14-00329-CV, 2014 WL 3002429 at *2-6 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we hold there is no final and appealable order in this matter and, therefore, we lack jurisdiction to decide this appeal.
Appellees' motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Tex.R.App.P. 42.3(a). 3