In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-07-109 CV
____________________
LISA M. ADAMS, Appellant
V.
LVNV FUNDING LLC, Appellee
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 06-04-03921-CV
Proceeding pro se, Lisa M. Adams appeals a summary judgment granted against her and in favor of appellee, LVNV Funding LLC ("LVNV"). We affirm.
Relying on Adams's deemed admissions, LVNV filed a motion for summary judgment. Adams, who was a pro se defendant, did not respond to the motion. After the trial court granted summary judgment to LVNV, Adams appealed. She raises a single appellate issue; she contends that summary judgment against her was improper because the limitations period for LVNV's cause of action had expired.
Adams, however, did not present this issue to the trial court in response to LVNV's motion for summary judgment. Thus, we cannot consider her limitations issue as grounds for reversing the summary judgment. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(c) ("Issues not expressly presented to the trial court by written motion, answer or other response shall not be considered on appeal as grounds for reversal."); McConnell v. Southside Indep. Sch. Dist., 858 S.W.2d 337, 343 (Tex. 1993) (citing City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d 671, 678 (Tex. 1979)). (1) When a non-movant fails to respond to a summary judgment motion, "the non-movant is limited on appeal to arguing the legal sufficiency of the grounds presented by the movant." McConnell, 858 S.W.2d at 343 (citing Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d at 678).
Because Adams's issue does not attack the legal sufficiency of the grounds presented
by LVNV, we overrule it and affirm the trial court's judgment.
AFFIRMED.
____________________________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Submitted on May 21, 2007
Opinion Delivered July 26, 2007
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.
1.