Khyber also relies on Powell v. CIT Bank, N.A., No. 14-15-00949-CV, 2017 WL 4228893 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] June 8, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.), to support its contrary contention. But Powell is inapplicable because it was not an abandonment of acceleration case.
Under the trial court's judgment, the Sandel Parties received the relief they requested as to the Cashman Parties' claims, and the Sandel Parties had no issue with their claims being dismissed as moot. See Powell v. CIT Bank, N.A., No. 14-15-00949-CV, 2017 WL 4228893, at *5 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] June 8, 2017, no pet.). Now that this court is reversing the parts of the trial court's judgment in which the court granted the Fourth Motion as to Armour's claims or adjudicated Armour's claims on the merits, the trial court's basis for dismissing the Sandel Parties' claims as moot has disappeared, and the Sandel
In light of our reversal of the trial court's summary judgment and rendition of judgment in favor of BBVA, we also remand for a determination on the merits of Francis's third-party claims.See, e.g.,Powell v. CIT Bank, N.A. , No. 14-15-00949-CV, 2017 WL 4228893, at *6 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 8, 2017, no pet.) (substitute mem. op.) (reversing trial court's judgment dismissing claim as moot because basis for trial court's mootness determination was no longer present).