Michelle Eisenberg v. Michael Eisenberg

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided February 2, 2015·No. 14-14-00982-CV·Published

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 29, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00982-CV

MICHELLE EISENBERG, Appellant V.

MICHAEL EISENBERG, Appellee

On Appeal from the 309th District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-68894

MEMORANDUM OPINION On December 10, 2014, appellant filed a notice of appeal in an attempt to appeal the trial court’s order awarding interim attorney’s fees signed November 25, 2014. The underlying suit seeks modification of the parent-child relationship as set out in the parties’ final divorce decree. The clerk’s record in this appeal was filed December 30, 2014. The record does not contain a final judgment in the modification suit.

Because it appeared that this court lacks jurisdiction over this attempted appeal from an interlocutory order, notification was transmitted to all parties of the

court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Our notice advised the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless appellant filed a response on or before January 16, 2015, demonstrating that this court has jurisdiction over the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). No response was filed.

Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory orders may be appealed only when expressly permitted by statute. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). The Texas Family Code specifically precludes the interlocutory appeal of temporary orders in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. See Tex. Fam. Code § 105.001(e); see also Mason v. Mason, 256 S.W.3d 716, 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.).

We lack jurisdiction over this attempted appeal from an interlocutory order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Wise.

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

Michelle Eisenberg v. Michael Eisenberg, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Michelle Eisenberg v. Michael Eisenberg (Michelle Eisenberg v. Michael Eisenberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp.
39 S.W.3d 191 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)
Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson
53 S.W.3d 352 (Texas Supreme Court, 2001)
Mason v. Mason
256 S.W.3d 716 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps
842 S.W.2d 266 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)