No. 05-06-00790-CVCourt of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas.
Opinion Filed October 2, 2006.
On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 06-04677.
Before Justices WRIGHT, MOSELEY, and LANG.
Appellant 606 Washington Limited filed an application for a temporary restraining order and temporary and permanent injunctions in the trial court seeking to enjoin appellee from using a tower crane appellant contended was trespassing into the airspace above appellant’s property. The trial court denied the application and this appeal ensued.
On September 1, 2006, appellee filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for mootness. Included in appellee’s motion was an affidavit verifying that the crane had been disassembled and was no longer being used. Appellee argues this case is moot because the crane is no longer invading appellant’s airspace. Appellant did not respond to the motion to dismiss.
Before a court may address the merits of any case, the court must have jurisdiction over the subject matter. State Bar v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994). Subject matter jurisdiction requires that the party bringing the suit have standing, that there be a live controversy between the parties, and that the case be justiciable. Id. A case becomes moot if a controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the legal proceedings, including the appeal. In re Kellogg Brown Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005). Courts have no jurisdiction to render advisory opinions on moot controversies Valley Baptist Med. Ctr. v. Gonzalez, 33 S.W.3d 821, 822 (Tex. 2000).
Because the tower crane about which appellant complained has been removed and the alleged trespassing has ceased, there is no longer a live controversy between the parties. Therefore, this case is moot, and we no longer have jurisdiction. See In re Kellogg Brown Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d at 737; Valley Baptist Med. Ctr. v. Gonzalez, 33 S.W.3d at 822.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.