Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ghaffari v. Empire Petroleum Partners, LLC

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth

February 22, 2018

FEYSAL GHAFFARI APPELLANT
v.
EMPIRE PETROLEUM PARTNERS, LLC APPELLEE

         FROM THE 342ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 342-266265-13

          PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and KERR, JJ.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION [1]

          BILL MEIER JUSTICE

         The cause below involved numerous parties, claims, counterclaims, cross claims, and third-party claims. One of the parties was pro se Appellant Feysal Ghaffari in his individual capacity. Another was Arlington Valero Corp., an entity with which Ghaffari may have some affiliation. The trial court ultimately signed a final order dismissing the cause, and any pending claims, for want of prosecution.

         Ghaffari appeals, but Arlington Valero does not. Instead of complaining about trial court rulings that were directed at him individually, in his five issues, Ghaffari challenges orders that were directed at Arlington Valero. Because Ghaffari is a party to this appeal in his individual capacity only, and because he has no justiciable interest in any potential error affecting only Arlington Valero, we will dismiss this appeal for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.

         Dallas Convenience Stores, Inc. sued Arlington Valero for breach of a commercial lease agreement and Nick Datoo, Shirin Datoo, and Ameen Hirani for breach of guarantees. The Datoos answered and filed a counterclaim against Dallas Convenience Stores and a third-party petition against Empire Petroleum. Empire Petroleum answered the Datoos' third-party petition; filed counterclaims against Arlington Valero (breach of contract, conversion, and theft), Nick Datoo (breach of guaranty, conversion, and theft), Shirin Datoo (conversion and theft), and Hirani (conversion and theft); and filed a third-party petition and claims against Ghaffari for conversion, theft, and tortious interference with existing contract. Ghaffari answered Empire's third-party petition and filed a "cross-claim" against Dallas Convenience Stores and no claims against Empire Petroleum.

         Dallas Convenience Stores ultimately reached a settlement agreement with Arlington Valero and the Datoos, and Ghaffari settled his claim against Dallas Convenience Stores. The trial court signed orders dismissing the claims between those parties and severed the dismissal orders into a separate cause. Dallas Convenience Stores also nonsuited its claim against Hirani, which left pending only the claims and third-party claims among Arlington Valero, the Datoos, Empire Petroleum, Hirani, and Ghaffari.

         Later, the trial court dismissed the third-party claims against Empire Petroleum; granted an interlocutory summary judgment in favor of Empire Petroleum and against Arlington Valero and Nick Datoo for $98, 244.80; and dismissed the remainder of the cause for want of prosecution on April 28, 2017. At the time of the dismissal, the only claims that remained pending were Empire Petroleum's counterclaims against Shirin Datoo and Hirani and Empire Petroleum's third-party claims against Ghaffari.

         Ghaffari identifies the following five issues:

Issue 1: The evidence does not support the Order of dismissal of 4/28/2017.
Issue 2: The trial court should not have rendered judgment against defendant for cumulative damages for concurrent causes of actions arising out of the same acts.
Issue 3: Lacks Standing (Law). Locus standi is the term for the ability of Empire to deliver a copy of the proof of "Something to lose" Doctrine $0.00 Loss, after the expiration of 3/28/2012 and refusal to refund the appellant's $25, 000.00 is not Empire lost, that cannot be cured, make an order/judgment void. Not just voidable.
Issue 4: Empire's claims are barred, in whole or in part, by Empire's noncompliance with applicable statutes and other provisions of law.
Issue 5: Empire's claims are barred, in whole or in part, by Empire's noncompliance with applicable ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.