Shrestha v. Gonzalez

• Decision Date: 01 July 2022
• Docket Number: 21-1034
• Citation: 647 S.W.3d 709 (Mem)
• Parties: Dristi SHRESTHA, Petitioner, v. Enya Hernandez GONZALEZ, Respondent
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

647 S.W.3d 709 (Mem)

Dristi SHRESTHA, Petitioner,

v.Enya Hernandez GONZALEZ, Respondent

No. 21-1034

Supreme Court of Texas.

OPINION DELIVERED: July 1, 2022

Thomas A. Culpepper, Dallas, Wade C. Crosnoe, for Respondent.

Mark A. Ticer, Jennifer W. Johnson, Dallas, for Petitioner.

PER CURIAM

The court of appeals’ opinion failed to advise the parties of the basic reasons for its decision to refuse this permissive appeal as Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.4 requires. See Indus. Specialists v. Blanchard Refin. Co. ––– S.W.3d ––––, –––– – ––––, 2022 WL 2082236, at *6-7 (Tex. 2022) (plurality op.); id. at –––– – ––––, 2022 WL 2082236 at *10-13 ( BUSBY , J., dissenting). Notwithstanding the court of appeals’ refusal to accept the appeal, this Court has jurisdiction to review the trial court's interlocutory order on the merits. See Indus. Specialists , ––– S.W.3d at –––– n.15, 2022 WL 2082236, at *7 n.15 ; Sabre Travel Int'l, Ltd. v. Deutsche Lufthansa AG , 567 S.W.3d 725, 733-34 (Tex. 2019). Exercising this Court's discretion under Texas Government Code section 22.001(a) and Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 56.1, however, we deny the petition for review.