James Edward Griggs v. Brandi Michelle Griggs
This text of James Edward Griggs v. Brandi Michelle Griggs (James Edward Griggs v. Brandi Michelle Griggs) 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
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-19-00325-CV __________________
JAMES EDWARD GRIGGS, Appellant
V.
BRANDI MICHELLE GRIGGS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 128th District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. A190037-D __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an attempted restricted appeal from a default judgment. In the notice
of appeal, appellant states that he filed a motion for new trial that was overruled by
operation of law. On September 25, 2019, we questioned our jurisdiction over the
purported restricted appeal and warned that we would dismiss the appeal unless
grounds for continuing the appeal were shown. Appellant did not file a response.
1 To prevail on a restricted appeal, appellant must show that: (1) he brought the
appeal within six months after the trial court signed the judgment; (2) he was a party
to the suit; (3) he did not participate in the hearing that resulted in the complained-
of judgment and did not file any post-judgment motions or requests for findings of
fact and conclusions of law; and (4) error is apparent on the face of the record. See
Tex. R. App. P. 30; Alexander v. Lynda’s Boutique, 134 S.W.3d 845, 848 (Tex.
2004). “These requirements are jurisdictional and will preclude a party’s right to
seek relief by way of a restricted appeal if they are not met.” Aero at Sp. Z.O.O. v.
Gartman, 469 S.W.3d 314, 315 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2015, no pet.). Therefore,
if a party timely files a post-judgment motion, restricted appeal is not available. Id.
at 317.
Because appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, this Court lacks
jurisdiction over this restricted appeal. See id. at 315, 317; see also Tex. R. App. P.
30. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice
Submitted on October 30, 2019 Opinion Delivered October 31, 2019
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
James Edward Griggs v. Brandi Michelle Griggs, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-edward-griggs-v-brandi-michelle-griggs-texapp-2019.