David L. Deyle v. Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 1, 2019
Docket03-18-00809-CV
StatusPublished

This text of David L. Deyle v. Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr. (David L. Deyle v. Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr.) 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
David L. Deyle v. Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr., (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00809-CV

David L. Deyle, Appellant

v.

Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr., Appellees

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF BASTROP COUNTY NO. 13-15889, HONORABLE TERRY L. FLENNIKEN, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant David L. Deyle filed a notice of appeal on December 6, 2018. The appeal

was from an order striking Deyle’s pleadings, “Intervention and Counterpetition to Modify

Parent-Child Relationship.” On January 16, 2019, the Clerk of this Court sent a letter informing

Deyle that it appeared this Court lacked jurisdiction over this matter because this Court’s jurisdiction

is limited to appeals in which there exists a final and appealable judgment or order. See Tex. Civ.

Prac. Rem. Code § 51.014(a) (appeal from interlocutory order); Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp.,

39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (“[T]he general rule, with a few mostly statutory exceptions is that

an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment. A judgment is final for purposes of appeal if

it disposes of all pending parties and claims in the record, except as necessary to carry out the

decree.”). This Court is without jurisdiction to review an order by the trial court striking a petition

to intervene. The Clerk requested that Deyle file a response by January 25, 2019, asking how this Court may exercise jurisdiction over this appeal and informing him that failure to do so would

result in the dismissal of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Deyle’s amended notice of appeal and response to this Court’s letter addressed the

timeliness of appellant’s notice of appeal but failed to address the issue of whether the appeal was

from a final and appealable judgment or order. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of

jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

__________________________________________

Thomas J. Baker, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Triana

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: February 1, 2019

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
David L. Deyle v. Mary Scales and Johnnie Victor Thomas, Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-l-deyle-v-mary-scales-and-johnnie-victor-thomas-jr-texapp-2019.