William H. Poff and Julia A. Poff v. Cypress Four Property Ventures LLC
14-16-00603-CV
| Tex. App. | Oct 19, 2017Background
- William and Julia Poff appealed a trial court eviction (forcible detainer) judgment entered against them by Cypress Four Property Ventures LLC.
- The lease at issue unambiguously terminated on January 30, 2017; parties attached the lease to appellate briefs.
- The Poffs acknowledged the lease expiration (stated in their reply brief as January 31, 2017) and argued a lease provision created month-to-month status by increasing rent, which the court found inconsistent with the termination clause.
- The Poffs vacated the property following the judgment of possession; they also pursued separate district-court claims for alleged wrongful eviction and statutory damages.
- Because possession ceased and the lease expired, the only live issue (right to current possession) was moot; the court therefore vacated the trial court’s judgment and dismissed the forcible detainer appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appeal of forcible detainer remains justiciable after tenant vacates and lease expires | Poff argued lease continued month-to-month (rent increase provision), implying ongoing right to possession | Cypress Four argued lease terminated Jan 30, 2017 and tenant no longer had claim to current possession | Mootness: appeal is moot; no live controversy over possession after lease expiration, so judgment vacated and case dismissed |
| Whether appellate relief would be futile once tenant vacated | Poff implied entitlement to relief on possession/eviction claims | Cypress Four said tenant no longer held a meritorious claim to current possession | Court held appellate relief would be futile because no claim to current possession existed |
| Whether forcible detainer judgment bars wrongful eviction/damages claims | Poff sought damages and wrongful-eviction relief | Cypress Four relied on forcible detainer outcome for possession only | Court noted forcible detainer decides immediate possession only and does not preclude separate wrongful-eviction suit; those claims belong in district court |
| Whether court may consider lease not in appellate record when assessing jurisdiction/mootness | Poff and Cypress relied on the lease in briefs | Cypress Four did not oppose consideration | Court permitted consideration of the lease for jurisdictional/mootness purposes |
Key Cases Cited
- Marshall v. Housing Auth. of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782 (Tex. 2006) (holding forcible detainer actions only decide right to immediate possession and that voluntary relinquishment plus lease expiration can render appeal moot)
- Sabine Offshore Serv., Inc. v. City of Port Arthur, 595 S.W.2d 840 (Tex. 1980) (court of appeals may consider matters outside record to determine jurisdiction/mootness)