in the Interest of G.A.M. Jr. and E.F.M.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 11, 2019
• Docket: 09-19-00162-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-19-00162-CV __________________

IN THE INTEREST OF G.A.M. JR. AND E.F.M.

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 418th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 10-06-06026-CV __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant M.L.M., the mother of the minor children G.A.M. Jr. and E.F.M.,

filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order denying her motion to recuse. On

May 31, 2019, we questioned our jurisdiction and requested that the parties file a

written reply by Monday, June 17, 2019. We received no response.

Courts of Appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders

unless they have jurisdiction based on a statute. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson,

53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); see, e.g., Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §

1 51.014 (West Supp. 2018). “No statute permits an interlocutory appeal of the denial

of a motion to recuse.” Zachaire v. Petefield, No. 14-11-00254-CV, 2011 WL

2150645, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 2, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Orders denying recusals are appealable only after the trial court has issued a final

judgment. In re Union Pac. Res. Co., 969 S.W.2d 427, 428 (Tex. 1998); In re

Norman, 191 S.W.3d 858, 860 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, orig.

proceeding); see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 18a(j)(1)(A); Tex. R. App. P. 16.3(c). Because

a final judgment has not been entered, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

See Zachaire, 2011 WL 2150645, at *1; In re Norman, 191 S.W.3d at 860.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

_________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice

Submitted on July 10, 2019 Opinion Delivered July 11, 2019

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.