Maurice Fitzpatrick v. AFG Companies, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 27, 2025
Docket02-25-00006-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Maurice Fitzpatrick v. AFG Companies, Inc. (Maurice Fitzpatrick v. AFG Companies, Inc.) 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
Maurice Fitzpatrick v. AFG Companies, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-25-00006-CV ___________________________

MAURICE FITZPATRICK, Appellant

V.

AFG COMPANIES, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 17th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 017-352358-24

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

On November 11, 2024, Appellant Maurice Fitzpatrick, proceeding pro se,

filed a motion to intervene in the trial court. On January 6, 2025, Fitzpatrick filed a

notice of appeal in this court, stating that his appeal is a “protective filing” that seeks

“appellate review of [the trial court’s] failure to rule on his Motion.”

We were informed by the trial court clerk that the trial judge had not signed any

orders or final judgment in this case. Therefore, it appeared that there was no final

judgment or order subject to appeal, making Fitzpatrick’s notice of appeal premature.

See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a), 27.1(a); see also Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191,

195, 200 (Tex. 2001) (holding that generally appeals may be taken only from final

judgments or interlocutory orders authorized by statute). Accordingly, we sent

Fitzpatrick a letter expressing our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal.

We stated that we could dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction unless he or any

party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response on or before January 21, 2025,

showing grounds for continuing the appeal.

Fitzpatrick did not respond to our letter, and an appealable order or final

judgment was not furnished to us. Without such an order or judgment, we have no

jurisdiction over his appeal. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195, 200. Thus, we 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.

2 /s/ Brian Walker

Brian Walker Justice

Delivered: February 27, 2025

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

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Maurice Fitzpatrick v. AFG Companies, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maurice-fitzpatrick-v-afg-companies-inc-texapp-2025.