Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust v. Double Diamond, Inc.,et Al

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 6, 2024
Docket11-24-00116-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust v. Double Diamond, Inc.,et Al (Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust v. Double Diamond, Inc.,et Al) 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.

Bluebook
Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust v. Double Diamond, Inc.,et Al, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

Opinion filed June 6, 2024

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________

No. 11-24-00116-CV ___________ ______ LADY ATTEGRENE ADAMS EXPRESS TRUST, Appellant V. DOUBLE DIAMOND, INC., ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pinto County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C51000

MEMORANDUM OPINION Victoria O’Brien, on behalf of Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust, has filed a pro se notice of appeal from the trial court’s purported “judgment for dismissal” in the underlying case. When this appeal was docketed, the district clerk’s office informed this court that the trial court had not entered an order in the proceedings below. On May 9, 2024, the clerk of this court informed O’Brien by letter that it did not appear that the trial court had entered an appealable order. We requested O’Brien to respond and show grounds to continue this appeal. We also informed her that this appeal may be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. O’Brien responded and stated that “the judgment for dismissal was issued after a conventional trial on the merits for the trial held on April 9, 2024.” However, the district clerk’s office has informed this court that nothing has been filed after April 2, 2024, and that no final orders exist in the proceedings below. Unless specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840–41 (Tex. 2007); Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). In this case, the trial court has not entered an appealable order in the proceedings below. Therefore, there is no appealable order for us to review, and we are without jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

W. BRUCE WILLIAMS JUSTICE

June 6, 2024 Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Texas a & M University System v. Koseoglu
233 S.W.3d 835 (Texas Supreme Court, 2007)
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lady Attegrene Adams Express Trust v. Double Diamond, Inc.,et Al, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lady-attegrene-adams-express-trust-v-double-diamond-incet-al-texapp-2024.