in the Matter of the Marriage of Stacey Leanne Zink and Daniel John Zink

Opinion

Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 12, 2020.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00046-CV

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF STACEY LEANNE ZINK AND DANIEL JOHN ZINK

On Appeal from the 246th District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-34604

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from an order signed January 16, 2020.

Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). When orders do not dispose of all pending parties and claims, the orders remain interlocutory and unappealable until final judgment is rendered, unless a statutory exception applies. 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).

The order being appealed granted the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Stuart Sanders, John Hattenberger, Don Metz, Tom Hutchins, and Carlos Garza. It does not contain language of finality, see Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195, and does not dispose of appellant’s claims against Daniel John Zink.

On February 21, 2020, appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellant filed no response. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Because the order being appealed is not a final, appealable judgment, appellee’s motion is granted.

The appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Hassan, and Poissant.