Opinion issued September 26, 2023
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-23-00319-CV
———————————
ANGELA D. DOWLING-PEREZ, Appellant
V.
LEGACY AT CYPRESS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 3
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1200767
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this forcible-detainer action, appellant, Angela D. Dowling-Perez,
proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the judgment and writ of possession
granting possession of certain real property to appellee, Legacy at Cypress.
We dismiss the appeal as moot.
The only issue in a forcible-detainer action is the right to actual possession of
the subject property, and the merits of any title dispute shall not be adjudicated. See
Tellez v. Rodriguez, 612 S.W.3d 707, 709 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020,
no pet.) (citing TEX. R. CIV. P. 510.3(e)). An appeal from a forcible-detainer action
becomes moot if the appellant is no longer in possession of the property, unless the
appellant holds and asserts “a potentially meritorious claim of right to current, actual
possession” of the property. See Marshall v. Hous. Auth. of the City of San Antonio,
198 S.W.3d 782, 786–87 (Tex. 2006); Wilhelm v. Fed. Nat. Mortg. Ass’n, 349
S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.); Gallien v. Fed.
Home Loan Mortg. Corp., No. 01-07-00075-CV, 2008 WL 4670465, at *2–4 (Tex.
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 23, 2008, pet. dism’d w.o.j.) (mem. op.).
On May 3, 2023, appellee filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that this appeal
is moot because the writ of possession was executed, “[a]ppellant was dispossessed
of the lease[d] premises on March 22, 2023 when [the] writ of possession was
executed,” and possession was “returned . . . back to” appellee. Appellant did not
respond to appellee’s motion to dismiss but has filed an appellant’s “brief.”
However, we conclude that appellant’s “brief” fails to assert a potentially
meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession of the property. See
Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 787; Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 768; see also Soza v. Fed.
Home Loan Mortg. Corp., No. 01-11-00568-CV, 2013 WL 3148616, at *1 (Tex.
2
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 18, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.) (stating appellant who
failed to respond to appellee’s motion to dismiss had failed to assert potentially
meritorious claim of right to current, actual possession).
Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal as moot. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); see also Marshall, 198 S.W.3d at 785, 787, 790;
Wilhelm, 349 S.W.3d at 769; Bey v. ASD Fin., Inc., No. 05-14-00534-CV, 2014 WL
4180933, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 11, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing
appeal of forcible detainer action as moot because appellant no longer possessed
property at issue). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Landau, and Farris.
3