A Texas court has dismissed an appeal filed by Shawn Keith Bice against SONMO, LLC regarding an eviction judgment. The Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District, ruled that the case is moot because Bice has already vacated the property in question. This decision impacts Bice, who sought to contest the eviction, and highlights the legal complexities surrounding forcible entry and detainer actions.

The dispute began when SONMO, LLC, the landlord, sought to evict Bice from a rental property. After the trial court ruled in favor of SONMO on August 24, 2026, Bice filed an appeal. However, the court later determined that since Bice had vacated the premises, the appeal could not proceed.

Background

Shawn Keith Bice was the appellant in this case, while SONMO, LLC served as the appellee. The conflict arose from a forcible entry and detainer action initiated by SONMO against Bice, seeking to regain possession of a rental property. Forcible entry and detainer cases are typically used by landlords to evict tenants who have not vacated the premises after their lease has ended or after failing to pay rent.

The case reached the Texas Court of Appeals after Bice contested the trial court's eviction judgment. On September 8, 2026, Bice filed an emergency motion for temporary relief, requesting a stay of the eviction judgment while his appeal was pending. The court initially granted this motion, temporarily halting the enforcement of the eviction.

The Ruling

On September 22, 2026, the Texas Court of Appeals vacated the temporary stay and denied Bice's motion for a stay. The court ruled that the appeal was moot because Bice had already vacated the premises. The court stated, "the appeal is moot and that we therefore lack jurisdiction over the appeal." This ruling was delivered by Justice Yismael D. Fonseca, along with Chief Justice Tijerina and Justice Cron.

The court referenced Texas law, noting that an appeal in a forcible-detainer case becomes moot when the appellant no longer possesses the property. The court emphasized that Bice failed to respond to the court's order, which required him to demonstrate that the appeal was not moot.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for Bice, who sought to challenge the eviction. By dismissing the appeal, the court effectively upheld the trial court's judgment, allowing SONMO to retain possession of the property without further legal contest from Bice. This case illustrates the importance of timely responses in legal proceedings, particularly in eviction cases where the timeline can quickly render an appeal moot.

The decision also serves as a reminder to tenants facing eviction that once they vacate the property, they may lose the ability to contest the eviction in court. This outcome may influence how future eviction cases are handled, particularly regarding the necessity of maintaining possession of the property during the appeals process.

What's Next

Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Bice plans to appeal the dismissal of his case. As it stands, the ruling from the Texas Court of Appeals concludes this particular legal battle over the eviction.