Michael Leonard Goebel and All Other Occupants of 207 Cazador Drive v. Sharon Peters Real Estate, Inc.
03-14-00635-CV
| Tex. App. | Mar 2, 2015Background
- Appellee Sharon Peters Real Estate, Inc. obtained the property at 207 Cazador Drive via a foreclosure-related purchase and sought possession in a forcible-detainer action.
- The Hays County Court at Law entered a final judgment on September 18, 2014, granting Peters immediate possession.
- Appellant Michael Goebel, the prior owner, appealed but did not supersede the judgment.
- A writ of possession issued and was executed on October 24, 2014; Peters took physical possession.
- Goebel has a separate, pending district-court title suit challenging the foreclosure sale; he is not a current occupant and has no lease with Peters.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal is moot because appellant no longer possesses the property | Goebel argues procedural defects (e.g., alleged bond issues) and challenges to foreclosure preserve his appeal | Peters contends Goebel is not in possession and has no meritorious claim to current possession, so no live controversy exists | Appeal is moot because Goebel lacks current, actual possession and no meritorious claim to possession exists |
| Whether defects in the foreclosure can defeat justice/county court jurisdiction in forcible-detainer | Goebel contends foreclosure was invalid, so lower courts lacked jurisdiction | Peters argues defects in foreclosure are title issues for district court and do not defeat forcible-detainer jurisdiction | Foreclosure defects are title issues; forcible-detainer limited to possession and county court jurisdiction stands |
| Whether failure to supersede prevents enforcement of judgment (writ of possession) | Implicitly, Goebel relied on appeal to stay enforcement | Peters notes unsuperseded judgments may be enforced and writs executed | Unsuperseded eviction judgments may be enforced; writ of possession properly executed |
| Whether award of costs prevents mootness | Goebel suggests costs keep controversy alive | Peters waived any right to collect costs to avoid that argument | Waiver of costs removes that basis; mootness remains |
Key Cases Cited
- Camarena v. Tex. Empl’t Comm’n, 754 S.W.2d 149 (Tex. 1988) (no jurisdiction when no live controversy exists)
- Rice v. Pinney, 51 S.W.3d 705 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2001) (forcible-detainer resolves immediate possession, not title)
- Marshall v. Housing Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782 (Tex. 2006) (unsuperseded eviction judgment may be enforced; appeal does not stay writ of possession automatically)