Opinion
No. 11-17-00101-CV
06-30-2017
On Appeal from the 32nd District Court Mitchell County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 16,499
ORDER
Appellee Marie Jarratt Hare filed an application to probate Lucile Jarratt Frazier's will and a codicil to that will. Appellants, who are heirs at law, filed contests to the probate of that will and codicil. Appellants also filed claims against Hare and Hare's daughter (Appellee Betty Smith). The trial court entered two orders from which Appellants filed a notice of appeal. In one of the orders, the trial court granted Appellees' motion to dismiss and denied Appellants' motion for summary judgment. In the other order, the trial court struck a supplemental pleading filed by one of the contestants. We subsequently questioned whether the orders from which Appellants appealed were final, appealable orders, and we requested that Appellants file a response to this court's inquiry concerning jurisdiction.
Although Appellants indicated in their notice of appeal that this appeal is an accelerated appeal, we are unaware of any authority supporting that assertion.
In their response, Appellants assert that the trial court entered a final, appealable order in this probate matter when it granted Appellees' motion to dismiss and entered a take-nothing judgment in favor of Appellees on all of the claims asserted against them by Appellants. The claims that were dismissed related not only to Frazier's will and estate but also to a ranch that Frazier had deeded to Hare prior to Frazier's death. It appears to this court that the dismissal of Appellants' claims against Appellees completely disposed of those claims and, as such, constituted a final, appealable order. See De Ayala v. Mackie, 193 S.W.3d 575, 578 (Tex. 2006) (order in probate proceeding is final and appealable before the entire proceeding is concluded if the order disposes of all parties or issues in a particular phase of the proceedings); Crowson v. Wakeham, 897 S.W.2d 779, 783 (Tex. 1995). Insofar as the trial court denied Appellants' motion for summary judgment, the trial court did not dispose of all parties or issues in a particular phase of the proceedings below.
Accordingly, we believe that, at this time, we have jurisdiction to review the orders from which Appellants filed a notice of appeal only insofar as the trial court dismissed Appellants' claims against Appellees and entered a take-nothing judgment on those claims. June 30, 2017
PER CURIAM Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
Willson, J., and Bailey, J.