vacating court of appeals’ judgment and dismissing cause
How later courts described this case
- vacating court of appeals’ judgment and dismissing cause
- once the trial court lost its plenary power it had no jurisdiction to act on a motion to unseal documents
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by The Times Herald Printing Company from an order denying a motion to unseal court records. The facts are set out in the opinion of the Court of Appeals. 717 S.W.2d 933 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1986). Since Times Herald was never a party to or an intervenor in the cause of action, the appeal should have been dismissed.
Gunn v. Cavanaugh,
391 S.W.2d 723 (Tex.1965); TEX.R.CIV.P. 60. We hold that the trial court and court of appeals erred in assuming jurisdiction. The record shows that the motion to unseal was filed and that Times Herald attempted to intervene after the trial court lost plenary power over its judgment.
First Alief Bank v. White,
682 S.W.2d 251 (Tex.1984); TEX.R. CIV.P. 329b. The court of appeals erred in disposing of this issue by implying that the district court only lost its plenary power to
alter
or
change
the judgment and that it still had plenary power to
uphold
the judgment. The trial court had no jurisdiction to consider the Motion to Unseal, because the judgment sealing the records was final in all respects. The court of appeals’ judgment conflicts with TEX.R.CIV.P. 329b. Therefore, pursuant to TEX.R.APP.P. 133(b), a majority of the court grants the application for writ of error and without hearing oral argument, the judgment of the court of appeals is vacated and the cause is dismissed.