John Deere Construction & Forestry Company v. Bradly S. Irwin

Court of Appeals
                  Tenth Appellate District of Texas

                             10-24-00159-CV


             John Deere Construction & Forestry Company,
                              Appellant

                                     v.

                             Bradly S. Irwin,
                                Appellee



                           On appeal from the
                82nd District Court of Falls County, Texas
                   Judge Bryan F. Russ Jr., presiding
                    Trial Court Cause No. CV41107

JUSTICE SMITH delivered the opinion of the Court.

                      MEMORANDUM OPINION

     On August 28, 2025, this Court issued an opinion and judgment

affirming the trial court’s take nothing judgment rendered against John Deere

Construction and Forestry Company. See John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co.

v. Irwin, No. 10-24-00159-CV, 2025 WL 2473027 (Tex. App.—Waco August 28,

2025, no pet. h.) (mem. op.). On November 4, 2025, this Court denied John

Deere’s motion for rehearing. Thereafter, John Deere filed a suggestion of
bankruptcy, notifying this Court that Appellee Bradley S. Irwin filed for

Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western

District of Texas on November 7, 2025. Accordingly, pursuant to Texas Rule

of Appellate Procedure 8.2, the appeal was suspended from that date. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 8.2.

       On March 26, 2026, John Deere filed a “Motion to Reinstate and Vacate

Judgment, Opinion, and Trial Court’s Judgment.” Attached as exhibits were

the bankruptcy court’s February 5, 2026 order of discharge and a certificate of

notice naming John Deere as a creditor whose claim was discharged. Due to

the discharge, the automatic stay was terminated. See 11 U.S.C.A. § 362(c);

TEX. R. APP. P. 8.3(a).

       Ordinarily, this Court would retain plenary power for thirty days after

the November 4, 2025 order overruling John Deere’s motion for rehearing. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 19.1(b). That thirty-day time period was disrupted by the

November 7, 2025 bankruptcy filing, but begins to run anew when the appeal

is reinstated after the bankruptcy stay is lifted. Id. R. 8.2. Accordingly,

because the bankruptcy stay has been terminated, we reinstate the appeal. Id.

R. 8.3(a).

       A bankruptcy court’s discharge order releases a debtor from personal

liability with respect to any discharged debt by voiding any past or future


John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co. v. Irwin                             Page 2
judgments on the debt and by operating as an injunction to prohibit creditors

from attempting to collect or to recover the debt. 11 U.S.C.A. § 524(a); Tenn.

Student Assistance Corp. v. Hood, 541 U.S. 440, 447 (2004). Thus, Irwin’s debt

owed to John Deere has been discharged and John Deere is prohibited from

attempting to collect the debt. Accordingly, there is no actual controversy

between Irwin and John Deere. A case becomes moot if at any stage there

ceases to be an actual controversy between the parties, and appellate courts

are prohibited from deciding moot controversies. See Nat’l Collegiate Athletic

Ass’n v. Jones, 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999). Specifically, an appeal in state

court that arises from a trial court judgment that is discharged in bankruptcy

is mooted by the bankruptcy court’s discharge order. See Chae v. Schneider,

244 S.W.3d 425, 427 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2007, no pet.). Any opinion issued

on the merits on appeal in a moot case would constitute an impermissible

advisory opinion. See Tex. Dep’t of Family and Protective Servs. v. Grassroots

Leadership, Inc., 717 S.W.3d 854, 862 (Tex. 2025). When a case becomes moot

on appeal, all previous orders and judgments are set aside. See Tex. Foundries,

Inc. v. Int’l Moulders & Foundry Workers’ Union, 248 S.W.2d 460, 461 (Tex.

1952).

       This appeal is reinstated on the docket of this Court.     Because the

controversy is moot, the trial court’s February 22, 2024 judgment and this


John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co. v. Irwin                             Page 3
Court’s August 28, 2025 opinion and judgment are vacated, and this case is

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(e); City of Garland v. Louton, 691 S.W.2d

603, 605 (Tex. 1985) (per curiam) (held that when a cause becomes moot, the

appellate court must dismiss the cause not merely dismiss the appeal).




                                             STEVE SMITH
                                             Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: April 16, 2026
Before Chief Justice Johnson,
       Justice Smith, and
       Justice Harris
Reinstated and Dismissed
CV06




John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co. v. Irwin                               Page 4