Urika Bjorkstam and Joseph Daniel Drey v. Woodward, Inc.
14-14-00927-CV
| Tex. App. | Jun 25, 2015Background
- Bjorkstam and Dray sued Woodward, Inc. in 2011 for a crash arising from a Mexican incident involving multiple defendants.
- Plaintiffs served some defendants but delayed serving Woodward for nearly two years after amending the petition to add Woodward.
- Court docket control orders extended deadlines for joinder and service, but Plaintiffs repeatedly failed to timely act toward Woodward.
- Woodward moved to dismiss for want of prosecution, arguing lack of due diligence in prosecuting the case.
- The trial court granted the motion to dismiss for want of prosecution with prejudice after an evidentiary hearing.
- Appellants challenge the dismissal on due diligence and preservation grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly dismissed for want of prosecution. | Bjorkstam contends delay was justified or not dismissal-worthy. | Woodward argues lack of due diligence warrants dismissal. | Yes; dismissal proper for lack of due diligence. |
| Whether equity and judicial economy support the dismissal. | Bjorkstam asserts no prejudicial impact or inequity. | Woodward argues delay harmed justice and docket management. | Yes; equities support dismissal. |
| Whether dismissal with prejudice was preserved for appeal. | Bjorkstam did not challenge the prejudice ruling below. | Woodward argues preservation failures foreclose reversal. | Yes; error not preserved; affirm. |
Key Cases Cited
- 3V, Inc. v. JTS Enters., Inc., 40 S.W.3d 533 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (diligence and dismissal standards in abuse of discretion)
- Villareal v. San Antonio Truck & Equipment, 994 S.W.2d 628 (Tex. 1999) (duty to maintain docket and remedy delays with dismissal)
- In re Conner, 458 S.W.3d 532 (Tex. 2015) (plaintiff's lack of diligence supports dismissal; abandonment presumption)
- Stoot v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 530 S.W.2d 930 (Tex. 1975) (delay undermines judicial economy and fact finding; inherent power to dismiss)
- Callahan v. Staples, 161 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. 1942) (mandatory service rules; failure renders service void)
- Zanchi v. Lane, 408 S.W.3d 373 (Tex. 2013) (party status and pleading timing affect diligence analysis)
- Priddy v. Rawson, 282 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009) (waiver and preservation principles for appellate review)