Charries Murray v. Willie Rose

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 27, 2014
Docket05-14-00235-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Charries Murray v. Willie Rose (Charries Murray v. Willie Rose) 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.

Bluebook
Charries Murray v. Willie Rose, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

DISMISS; and Opinion Filed June 27, 2014.

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00235-CV

CHARRIES MURRAY, Appellant V. WILLIE ROSE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 302nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-19586

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Francis, and Lang-Miers Opinion by Justice Lang-Miers In a letter dated April 21, 2014, the Court questioned jurisdiction over this appeal.

Specifically, although the notice of appeal stated that appellant appealed a final order of the trial

court dated February 19, 2014, the clerk’s record before the Court did not include an order

bearing that date and also did not include any other appealable order. We requested the appellant

to file a supplemental clerk’s record including the trial court’s order that was the subject of the

appeal. To date appellant has not responded. Nevertheless, the Court must determine whether it

has jurisdiction to proceed with this appeal, even if it is necessary to do so sua sponte. Bank of

New York Mellon v. Guzman, 390 S.W.3d 593, 596 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.); Pierce v.

Corbett, No. 05-97-00017-CV, 1999 WL 52964 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 5, 1999, no pet.)

(mem. op.). Generally, this Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments. See

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Here there is no final judgment

from which the appellant has properly perfected an appeal in the clerk’s record. Accordingly,

the appellate record fails to reflect the existence of jurisdiction. Because we find no basis for

jurisdiction over this appeal, we DISMISS the appeal.

/Elizabeth Lang-Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS JUSTICE

140235F.P05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

CHARRIES MURRAY, Appellant On Appeal from the 302nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-14-00235-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DF-13-19586. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang-Miers. WILLIE ROSE, Appellee Justices Bridges and Francis participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. It is ORDERED that appellee WILLIE ROSE recover his costs of this appeal from appellant CHARRIES MURRAY.

Judgment entered this 27th day of June, 2014.

–3–

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)
Bank of New York Mellon v. Guzman, Carmen and Jose
390 S.W.3d 593 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Charries Murray v. Willie Rose, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charries-murray-v-willie-rose-texapp-2014.