Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST—Tex. App.: Partial summary judgment order not final and appealable, (Jan 27, 2016)

By Michael Menzhuber, J.D., LL.M.

The Texas appellate court in Austin lacked jurisdiction to rule on a trial court’s summary judgment order that addressed only a declaratory judgment to construe an amended restrictive covenant, and not the Texas Anti-Trust Act and Sherman Act claims. The court determined that the order was not final and appealable because it did not dispose of all the parties and all the causes of action (Twin Creeks Golf Group, L.P. v. Sunset Ridge Owners Association, Inc., January 26, 2016, Goodwin, M.).

Sunset Ridge Owners Association, Inc. brought an action against Twin Creeks Property, Ltd. and Twin Creeks Operating Co., L.P. in which it: (1) asserted claims based on a monopoly, in violation of the Texas Anti-Trust Act and the Sherman Act; and (2) sought a declaratory judgment to construe an amended restricted covenant and declare it invalid, based on a provision of the Texas Uniform Condominium Act. After Twin Creeks Golf Group (TCGG) filed a plea in intervention, Sunset filed a motion for summary judgment against TCGG on its declaratory judgment claim, but not on its monopoly claim.

After the trial court signed the order, which only addressed Sunset’s declaratory judgment claim, the parties were unable to agree whether the partial summary judgment order was a final appealable order and the matter was appealed to the Texas appellate court.

TCGG contended that the trial court’s order was not final and appealable because it did not dispose of all parties and causes of action. The appellate court agreed. It determined that the language of the trial court’s partial summary judgment order supported it not being final because it: (1) addressed only Sunset’s claim for declaratory judgment; (2) anticipated a final judgment based on the order; and (3) did not contain language stating that it disposed of all parties and claims or that it was a final appealable order. Therefore, the partial summary judgment order was an interlocutory order that was not appealable.

Sunset’s monopoly claim remained pending at the time the order was signed. The appellate court concluded that Sunset’s subsequent amendment to remove this claim did not make the trial court’s order final and appealable and that a further order from the trial court was required.

The case is No. 03-15-00763-CV.

Attorneys: J. Allen Halbrock, Jr. (Sneed, Vine & Perry, PC) for Twin Creeks Golf Group, L.P. Noel L. Stout (Almanza, Blackburn & Dickie, LLP) for Sunset Ridge Owners Association, Inc.

Companies: Twin Creeks Golf Group, L.P.; Sunset Ridge Owners Association, Inc.

Cases: Antitrust TexasNews