Jerald Miller v. Tarrant County Sheriff's Department, Tarrant County, Tarrant County District Attorney, City of Fort Worth, City of Fort Worth Department of Animal Control, City of Fort Worth Code Compliance, City of Fort Worth Police Department, Victoria Martinez A/K/A Alisa Martinez, and Amberness Hernandez

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 23, 2025
• Docket: 02-25-00451-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-25-00451-CV ___________________________

JERALD MILLER, Appellant

V.

TARRANT COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, TARRANT COUNTY, TARRANT COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CITY OF FORT WORTH, CITY OF FORT WORTH DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL CONTROL, CITY OF FORT WORTH CODE COMPLIANCE, CITY OF FORT WORTH POLICE DEPARTMENT, VICTORIA MARTINEZ A/K/A ALISA MARTINEZ, AND AMBERNESS HERNANDEZ, Appellees

On Appeal from the 153rd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 153-361706-25

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Jerald Miller, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal from the trial

court’s order denying his motion for continuance.

We have jurisdiction to consider appeals only from final judgments and from

certain interlocutory orders made immediately appealable by statute. Lehmann v. Har-

Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195, 200 (Tex. 2001); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann.

§ 51.014(a) (listing appealable interlocutory orders).

Because an order denying a motion for continuance is neither a final judgment

nor an appealable interlocutory order, we notified Miller by letter of our concern that

we lack jurisdiction over this appeal and warned that unless he or any other party filed

a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we could dismiss it for want of

jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Miller filed a response, but it does not

address our jurisdictional concern.

Without a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order, we do not have

jurisdiction over the appeal. We thus dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195, 200; see also In re R.B.,

No. 02-24-00531-CV, 2025 WL 285336, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 23, 2025,

no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction because order being

appealed was not a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order).

2 /s/ Brian Walker

Brian Walker Justice

Delivered: October 23, 2025