Allen F. Calton v. G. Ekeke
This text of Allen F. Calton v. G. Ekeke (Allen F. Calton v. G. Ekeke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-16-00092-CV ____________________
ALLEN F. CALTON, Appellant
V.
G. EKEKE, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________
On Appeal from the 58th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. A-198,064 ________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Allen F. Calton filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s denial
of his “Motion for Preliminary Injunction.” The clerk’s record demonstrates that
the initial relief requested was a temporary restraining order pending subsequent
hearings on a temporary injunction and permanent mandatory injunctive relief, and
the trial court treated the motion as an application for a temporary restraining
order. On April 6, 2016, we notified Calton that his appeal was subject to dismissal
because the notice of appeal neither stated that a final order had been signed nor
1 identified an interlocutory order for which an appeal was available. In his response,
Calton concedes he is appealing the denial of a temporary restraining order, but he
argues the appeal may proceed as an appeal from the denial of a temporary
injunction.
A temporary restraining order directs the conduct of a party pending
imminent disposition of a request for a temporary injunction. See In re Tex. Nat.
Res. Conservation Comm’n, 85 S.W.3d 201, 205 (Tex. 2002). An interlocutory
order on an application for a temporary restraining order is generally not an
appealable order. Rakowitz v. Bexar Cty. Sheriffs Dep’t, No. 04-13-00093-CV,
2013 WL 2446725, at *1 (Tex. App—San Antonio June 5, 2013, no pet.) (mem.
op.). Calton’s response does not show grounds for continuing the appeal. This
appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
________________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice
Submitted on May 11, 2016 Opinion Delivered May 12, 2016
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Allen F. Calton v. G. Ekeke, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-f-calton-v-g-ekeke-texapp-2016.