Jasmine Montgomery and Attorney Sonya Chandler Anderson v. Wanda Mattucci

Opinion

02-11-341-CV

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00341-CV

JASMINE MONTGOMERY AND ATTORNEY SONYA CHANDLER ANDERSON

APPELLANTS

V.

WANDA MATTUCCI

APPELLEE

------------

FROM THE 393RD DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

          The trial court granted Appellee Wanda Mattucci’s motion for sanctions, and Appellants Jasmine Montgomery and Sonya Chandler Anderson filed their notice of appeal of this order while a motion for summary judgment remained pending in the trial court.

          On September 1, 2011, we notified the appellants of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the July 29, 2011 order did not appear to be final or to be an appealable interlocutory order, and we informed them that their appeal was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless they or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed with the court a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal on or before September 12, 2011.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Byrd v. Byrd, No. 02-07-00404-CV, 2008 WL 204511, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 24, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing attempted appeal because sanctions order was neither a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order).  We sent another notice on September 14, 2011, giving the appellants until September 26, 2011, to file a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  Having received no response from the appellants, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

                                                                             PER CURIAM

PANEL:  MCCOY, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.        

DELIVERED:  October 13, 2011

---

[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.