Johnny Partain v. State of Texas

ACCEPTED
15-25-00005-CV
FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
No. 15-25-00005-CV 1/7/2026 10:11 AM
CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE
CLERK
FILED IN
15th COURT OF APPEALS

In The
AUSTIN, TEXAS
1/7/2026 10:11:46 AM

Fifteenth Court Of Appeals CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE
Clerk

JOHNNY PARTAIN
Appellant

v.

STATE OF TEXAS
Appellee

APPELLANT'S SUGGESTION OF MOOTNESS AND
FORMAL MOTION TO VACATE AND DISMISS FOR WANT
OF JURISDICTION

JOHNNY R. PARTAIN
7020 N 16th Street
McAllen, Texas 78504
956-240-1821
No. 15-25-00005-CV

In The
Fifteenth Court Of Appeals

JOHNNY PARTAIN
Appellant

v.

STATE OF TEXAS
Appellee

APPELLANT'S SUGGESTION OF MOOTNESS AND
FORMAL MOTION TO VACATE AND DISMISS FOR WANT
OF JURISDICTION

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THIS COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW JOHNNY PARTAIN, Appellant in the above styled and numbered

cause and files his Appellant’s Suggestion of Mootness And Formal Motion To Vacate And

Dismiss For Want Of Jurisdiction, and shows unto the Court the following.

As established by the Supplemental Clerk’s Record (Supp. CR 6), the 'ORDER

DISMISSING CAUSE AS MOOT' filed in this Court on January 5, 2026, the Hidalgo

County District Court in Case No. C-0929-12-F—the court of dominant jurisdiction—
rendered a final, non-appealable judgment on July 29, 2025. This judgment vacates the

foundational orders upon which the State and the Travis County District Court relied in

Case No. D-1-GN-24-002560. See CR 10-11, ¶ 15. Because the controversy regarding the

debt has been finally adjudicated in a coordinate court of dominant jurisdiction, no live

controversy remains. Consequently, this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction and is

constitutionally mandated under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 43.2(e) to vacate

the Travis County judgment and dismiss the underlying cause of action. Any further ruling

on the merits would constitute an unconstitutional advisory opinion.

On July 29, 2025, Hidalgo County District Court, case no. C-0929-12-F (Hidalgo), a

case involving inverse condemnation complaints against the State of Texas and its political

subdivisions entered its final order stating -

“Comes now the Court finding that Johnny Partain has already been justly and

adequately compensated by the State Of Texas for all his claims in the above

styled and number cause, making this case MOOT. IT IS ORDERED that any

orders or judgments previously issued in this case are vacated. IT IS

ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice.”

A case is moot when the controversy between the parties has ceased to exist or has been

resolved. The Travis Court’s permanent injunction being appealed (CR 201-205) sought to

prevent Partain from collecting this just and adequate compensation. This unappealed final

judgment confirms the debt existed, that compensation was collected, and the claim settled.

The State of Texas, through the Attorney General's Office, is engaging in an impermissible

collateral attack by seeking to enforce a contradictory order that interferes with a final
judgment of a coordinate court, violating the Texas Constitution's prohibition on advisory

opinions and Art. 1, Sec. 29 regarding compensation.

Most recently, the Texas Supreme Court reaffirmed in Texas Dep't of Family &

Protective Servs. v. Grassroots Leadership, Inc., ___ S.W.3d ___, No. 23-0192 (Tex. May 30,

2025), that mootness is a strict constitutional constraint. The Court held that 'there is no

such thing as a public-interest exception to mootness in Texas' and that courts 'should have

proceeded no further' once a case becomes moot. We have reiterated—and described as a

“fundamental rule”—that a “court may not reach the merits if it finds a single valid basis to

defeat jurisdiction.” Rattray v. City of Brownsville, 662 S.W.3d 860, 868 (Tex. 2023). Any

opinion rendered by this Court on the merits of the Travis County injunction would be a

prohibited advisory opinion because the Hidalgo Final Judgment (Supp. CR 6) has

definitively settled the debt controversy, leaving no relief for this Court to provide.

The 15th Court, as a court of limited statewide jurisdiction, lacks the power to revive

a controversy that Section 29 has already declared void and that the Hidalgo final judgment

(Supp. CR 6) has declared moot. The Texas Constitution specifically removes the State’s

authority, including a court’s authority to violate a citizen’s right to just and adequate

compensation. Tx. Const. Art. 1 Sec. 29 states, “To guard against transgressions of the

high powers herein delegated, we declare that every thing in this "Bill of Rights" is excepted

out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws

contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void.” Even the excuse of due

process is left wanting. Tx. Const. Art. 1 Sec. 29 voids any acts of the State of Texas to

uncompensate Partain. The court must vacate any orders or judgments previously issued
and dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction. Heckman v. Williamson Cnty., 369 S.W.3d

137, 162 (Tex. 2012).

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant Johnny Partain respectfully

requests that this Court take notice of the Supplemental Clerk’s Record, find that this cause

has become moot, and pursuant to TRAP 43.2(e), vacate the Travis County District Court’s

judgment, and any other orders issued therein, and dismiss the underlying cause for want of

jurisdiction.

Respectfully Submitted,

___________________________
Johnny Partain
7020 N 16th Street
McAllen, Texas 78504
partain@atlastechnologies.biz
956-240-1821

VERIFICATION

My name is Johnny Ray Partain, date of birth 10/01/1964, residing at 7020 N 16th Street, McAllen,
Texas 78504, and I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in
Hidalgo County, State of Texas, on the 7th day of January, 2026.

___________________________
Johnny Partain
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
As required by TRAP 10.1(a)(5), I certify that I have conferred, or made a reasonable
attempt to confer, with all other parties through Mr. Kyle Argenbright, Assistant Attorney
General Litigation Division, Kyle.Argenbright@oag.texas.gov, about the merits of this
motion. There was no response.

Date: January 7, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been
serviced by email to Mr. Kyle Argenbright, Assistant Attorney General General Litigation
Division, Kyle.Argenbright@oag.texas.gov, on this January 7, 2026.

___________________________
Johnny Partain
7020 N 16th Street
McAllen, Texas 78504
partain@atlastechnologies.biz
956-240-1821
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Envelope ID: 109747202
Filing Code Description: Motion
Filing Description: Appellant???s Suggestion of Mootness And Formal
Motion To Vacate And Dismiss For Want Of Jurisdiction
Status as of 1/7/2026 11:06 AM CST

Case Contacts

Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status

Johnny Partain partain@atlastechnologies.biz 1/7/2026 10:11:46 AM SENT

Kyle Argenbright Kyle.Argenbright@oag.texas.gov 1/7/2026 10:11:46 AM SENT