Full Opinion

Motion Denied, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum Opinion filed November 5, 2026. In The Fifteenth Court of Appeals NO. 15-26-00178-CV STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant V. LOLA OLIVIA, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 261st District Court Travis County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D-1-GN-26-005428 MEMORANDUM OPINION That State of Texas filed a notice of appeal from a trial court order signed on August 21, 2026, dismissing the State’s suit against Lola Olivia, Inc. under Rule 91a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. In that order, the trial court directed the parties to submit briefing on the issue of whether Lola Olivia was entitled to recover attorney’s fees and costs and stated that, if necessary, it would “set a hearing on whether to make an award of fees and costs, and the amount of any such fees and costs.” Unless specifically authorized by statute, the appellate jurisdiction of this court is limited to appeals from final judgments. CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444, 447 (Tex. 2011). A judgment is final and appealable if it disposes of all parties and all claims in the case. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Here, the order of dismissal expressly excludes Lola Olivia’s claim for attorney’s fees and costs, and as a result, there is no final judgment in this case. Seeking to cure this jurisdictional defect, the State has now filed an unopposed motion to abate its appeal. In its motion, the State explains that the trial court has not yet ruled on whether attorney’s fees and costs may be awarded and requests that we remand the case to the trial court for the limited purpose of resolving that claim. In some cases, we may treat a notice of appeal as filed prematurely. Appellate Rule 27.2 provides that an appellate court “may allow an appealed order that is not final to be modified so as to be made final and may all the modified order and all proceedings relating to it to be included in a supplemental record.” Tex. R. App. P. 27.2. Generally, appellate courts have jurisdiction to abate an appeal pursuant to Rule 27.2 when the action by the trial court is ministerial, such as signing an order nonsuiting a party to modify an order that is not final. Paxton v. City of Austin, 722 S.W.3d 50, 54 (Tex. App.—15th Dist. 2024, pet. granted), mand. granted on other grounds, 741 S.W.3d 109, 118 (Tex. 2026). In this case, however, the trial court’s consideration of Lola Olivia’s pending claim for attorney’s fees and costs is not a ministerial act. See Leniek v Evolution Well Servs., LLC, No. 14-18-00954-CV, 2019 WL 438825, at *2 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 2, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.) (denying motion to abate to 2 allow trial court to rule on amount of attorney’s fees to make matter final and appealable); Trane US, Inc. v. Sublett, 501 S.W.3d 783, 787 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2016, no pet.) (denying request to abate case for trial court ruling on pending request for attorney’s fees and sanctions). Instead, the merits of Lola Olivia’s claim for attorney’s fees and costs is disputed, and the parties may adduce evidence in support of their positions. Under these circumstances, abatement of the appeal is not appropriate. The State’s motion to abate is denied. Because there is no final judgment, our appellate jurisdiction has not been invoked. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Field and Farris. 3