Latosha Diggles v. Dick Law Firm. PLLC, Eric B. Dick, Lindsay Law Firm, PLLC, Texas Farmers Insurance Company

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 12, 2024
• Docket: 01-24-00420-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued December 12, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00420-CV ——————————— LATOSHA DIGGLES, Appellant V. DICK LAW FIRM, PLLC, ERIC B. DICK, LINDSAY LAW FIRM, PLLC, AND TEXAS FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellees

On Appeal from the 234th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2024-00682

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant attempts to appeal the trial court’s May 6, 2024 order denying her

request for findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding an April 17, 2024 order

dismissing her claims against one of the defendants in the underlying case. Generally, appellate courts have jurisdiction only over appeals from final

judgments unless a statute authorizes an interlocutory appeal. CMH Homes v. Perez,

340 S.W.3d 444, 447–48 (Tex. 2011); see N.Y. Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Sanchez,

799 S.W.2d 677, 679–80 (Tex. 1990) (citing N.E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 200

S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966) (“In the absence of a special statute making an

interlocutory order appealable, a judgment must dispose of all issues and parties in

the case . . . to be final and appealable.”). The order appellant seeks to appeal is

neither a final judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order. Thus, we lack

jurisdiction over appellants’ attempted appeal. See In re M.G., No. 01–05–00426–

CV, 2006 WL 1549754, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 8, 2006, no pet.)

(mem. op.) (“When a party attempts to appeal a non-appealable interlocutory order,

appellate courts have no jurisdiction except to declare the interlocutory nature of the

order and to dismiss the appeal.”) (citations omitted).

The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the appeal was subject to

dismissal for lack of jurisdiction unless a written response was provided

demonstrating that this Court has jurisdiction over the appeal. Appellant failed to

adequately respond.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

2 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Countiss.