Abiodun Henri Lagoye v. Ricardo Pina

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: April 14, 2005
• Docket: 14-02-01001-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 14, 2005

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 14, 2005.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-01001-CV

ABIODUN HENRI LAGOYE, Appellant

V.

RICARDO PINA, Appellee

On Appeal from the 165th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 01-41575

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

This is an attempted appeal from a summary judgment, signed September 6, 2002.  Appellant filed an untimely motion for new trial on October 8, 2002.  Appellant=s notice of appeal was filed on September 19, 2002. 

In his brief, appellee claims the judgment is interlocutory.  We agree.  Appellant filed suit against two parties, Major Connection Incorporation and Ricardo Pina.  The judgment from which appellant appeals is an order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Pina.  The record contains no order of severance. 

 A judgment that finally disposes of all remaining parties and claims, based on the record in the case, is final, regardless of its language.  Lehmann v. Har‑Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001).  A summary judgment which does not dispose of all parties and issues in the pending suit is interlocutory and not appealable unless a severance is ordered.  Hood v. Amarillo Nat. Bank, 815 S.W.2d 545, 547 (Tex. 1991); Pan American Petroleum Corp. v. Texas Pacific Coal & Oil Co., 159 Tex. 550, 324 S.W.2d 200, 200‑01 (1959).  AIn the absence of an order of severance, a party against whom such an interlocutory summary judgment has been rendered will have his right of appeal when and not before the same is merged in a final judgment disposing of the whole case.@  Pan American, 324 S.W.2d at 201.  

The judgment states it is a partial summary judgment in favor of one party.  There is no judgment or order disposing of the other defendant.  Because no order of severance was signed, the partial summary judgment in favor of Pina is interlocutory and not appealable.  This court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments and appeals from certain interlocutory judgments as provided by statute.  See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.CODE ' 51.02 (Vernon 1997) (stating that in a civil case involving more than $100, a party may appeal a final judgment from a district or county court to the court of appeals); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.CODE ' 51.014(a)(1)‑(10) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (listing the types of cases in which an interlocutory appeal may be brought).  There is no statutory provision for appeal of the type of judgment presented in this case.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 14, 2005.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Hudson.