Shipley v. Unifund CCR Partners

Robert Shipley appeals from the entry of a judgment against him for a debt on a credit card account. Shipley complains that the trial court erred by not dismissing the suit against him because Unifund CCR Partners lacked standing to bring the suit because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction in that Unifund CCR Partners did not own the debt and therefore did not have standing to bring the action. Shipley also complains that the evidence was legally insufficient for the trial court to have granted a judgment against him and in favor of Unifund CCR Partners because there was no evidence that Shipley’s debt had been assigned to Unifund CCR Partners.

On original submission, this Court affirmed the judgment. See Shipley v. Unifund CCR Partners, No. 10-09-00314-CV, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 4544 (Tex. App.–Waco June 16, 2010). Upon Shipley’s timely motion for rehearing, we requested a response from Unifund CCR Partners, although Unifund has not done so. As authorized by Rule of Appellate Procedure 49.3, we issue this modified opinion after requesting the response. TEX. R. APP. P. 49.3. On reconsideration of the issues presented, we will reverse the judgment, dismiss this cause for lack of jurisdiction, and withdraw our prior opinion and judgment. Id.