However, "[a] justice court has exclusive jurisdiction to decide the issue of immediate possession," and other courts may not infringe upon this exclusive jurisdiction. Midway CC Venture I, LP v. O&V Venture, LLC, 527 S.W.3d 531, 535 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.); Home Sav. Ass'n v. Ramirez, 600 S.W.2d 911, 913 (Tex. Civ. App.—Corpus Christi 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (explaining the purpose of forcible entry and detainer actions and justice courts' exclusive jurisdiction to determine these causes of action); see, e.g., Midway CC Venture I, 527 S.W.3d at 532, 535 (landlord filed forcible detainer action in justice court after obtaining a declaratory judgment in district court, and justice court had exclusive jurisdiction over the issue of immediate possession). We conclude the trial court lacked jurisdiction to determine the issue of immediate possession and therefore vacate the portion of the trial court's judgment ordering Laredo Jet to vacate the leased premises.

The district court cannot interfere with or prohibit the justice court from exercising its exclusive jurisdiction over evictions, absent a dispute as to title. 527 S.W.3d 531, 535-536 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.). The loss at issue is monetary in nature for the issues before the Court, therefore, and the issue of possession is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court.

"An injunction so broad that it enjoins a defendant from a lawful and proper exercise of his rights is an abuse of discretion." Midway CC Venture I, LP v. O&V Venture, LLC, 527 S.W.3d 531, 534 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.).

Holubec v. Brandenberger, 111 S.W.3d 32, 39-40 (Tex. 2003); accord CoyoteLake Ranch, LLC v. City of Lubbock, 498 S.W.3d 53, 65 (Tex. 2016). "An injunction so broad that it enjoins a defendant from a lawful and proper exercise of his rights is an abuse of discretion." Midway CC Venture I, LP v. O&V Venture,LLC, 527 S.W.3d 531, 534 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.).

"We will not reverse the trial court's order unless the trial court's action was 'so arbitrary that it exceeded the bounds of reasonable discretion.'" Midway CC Venture I, LP v. O&V Venture, LLC, 527 S.W.3d 531, 533 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.) (quoting Tel. Equip. Network, Inc. v. TA/Westchase Place, Ltd., 80 S.W.3d 601, 607 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.)). A trial court does not abuse its discretion if some evidence reasonably supports the trial court's decision.