in the Interest of E.A., a Child
This text of in the Interest of E.A., a Child (in the Interest of E.A., a Child) 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
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 2, 2017
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-00058-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF E.A., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 470th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 470-04225-2016
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Appellant appeals from the trial court’s October 17, 2016 order granting a bill of review
and vacating a divorce decree. After reviewing the clerk’s record, we questioned our jurisdiction
over this appeal because there did not appear to be an appealable order. We instructed appellant
to file, by March 3, 2017, a letter brief addressing our concern and cautioned her that failure to
do so may result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. As of today’s date, appellant
has not responded.
Generally, this Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgements and certain
interlocutory orders as permitted by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191,
195 (Tex. 2001). A final judgment is one that disposes of all pending parties and claims. See id.
An order on a petition for bill of review that sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of
all the issues of the case on the merits is interlocutory in nature and not a final appealable judgment. See Kiefer v. Touris, 197 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2006); Tesoro Petroleum v. Smith,
796 S.W.2d 705 (Tex. 1990) (per curiam).
In the order, the trial court granted the bill of review and vacated the final decree of
divorce without disposing of all the issues of the case on the merits. For this reason, the order is
interlocutory and not appealable. See Kiefer, 197 S.W.3d at 302; Tesoro Petroleum, 796 S.W.2d
at 705. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
170058F.P05
–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF E.A., A CHILD On Appeal from the 470th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas No. 05-17-00058-CV Trial Court Cause No. 470-04225-2016. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellee Samuel Anyimadu recover his costs of this appeal from appellant Jacqueline Jones.
Judgment entered May 2, 2017.
–3–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in the Interest of E.A., a Child, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ea-a-child-texapp-2017.