Danny Lee Gonzales v. Crystal Cassandra Flores

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 26, 2009
Docket14-08-00991-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Danny Lee Gonzales v. Crystal Cassandra Flores (Danny Lee Gonzales v. Crystal Cassandra Flores) 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
Danny Lee Gonzales v. Crystal Cassandra Flores, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 26, 2009

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 26, 2009.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-08-00991-CV

DANNY LEE GONZALES, Appellant

V.

CRYSTAL CASSANDRA FLORES, Appellee

On Appeal from the 245th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2008-49718

M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N

According to information provided to this Court, this is an attempted appeal from an order signed October 7, 2008, which denied appellant=s claim of indigency and request for an appointed attorney in his pending divorce action. 

Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments.  Lehmann v. Har‑Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).  Interlocutory orders may be appealed only if permitted by statute.  Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). 


There is no statute providing for an interlocutory appeal of the court's ruling on indigency for trial proceedings.  Lomax v. Thomas, No. 14‑08‑00163‑CV, 2008 WL 4308610, *1 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] Aug. 28, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.).  Thus, an order denying indigent status may not be appealed before entry of final judgment.  In contrast, a trial court=s indigency ruling pertaining to an already pending appeal is appealable. See In re Arroyo, 988 S.W.2d 737, 738‑39 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding).

On February 11, 2009, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court=s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).  To date, no response has been filed.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Anderson and Seymore.

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)
Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson
53 S.W.3d 352 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)
In Re Arroyo
988 S.W.2d 737 (Texas Supreme Court, 1998)
Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps
842 S.W.2d 266 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Danny Lee Gonzales v. Crystal Cassandra Flores, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danny-lee-gonzales-v-crystal-cassandra-flores-texapp-2009.