Peter Swart v. Nora Morales

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 10, 2019
Docket05-18-01229-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Peter Swart v. Nora Morales (Peter Swart v. Nora Morales) 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
Peter Swart v. Nora Morales, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion Filed April 10, 2019

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-01229-CV

PETER SWART, Appellant V. NORA MORALES, Appellee

On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-16-24538

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Osborne, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Nowell After reviewing the clerk’s record, we questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal because

there did not appear to be an appealable order. We instructed appellant to file a letter brief

addressing the jurisdictional issue and permitted appellee to file a response to appellant’s letter

brief. Both parties filed letter briefs addressing the jurisdictional issue.

Although the record includes a memorandum ruling on the trial court’s letterhead, the

ruling is not signed. See In re Newby, 266 S.W.3d 557, 558 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2008, orig.

proceeding) (per curiam) (letter ruling satisfies requisites of formal judgment or order when,

among other factors, it is signed). This Court has jurisdiction over appeals from signed orders or

judgments. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). Without a signed appealable order, this Court lacks

jurisdiction over this appeal. See Farmer v. Ben E. Keith Co., 907 S.W.2d 495, 496 (Tex. 1995) (per curiam) (“appellate timetable does not commence to run other than by signed, written order”)

(emphasis in original).

Further, this is an appeal of the denial of a special appearance in a divorce proceeding.

Section 51.014(a)(7) of the civil practice and remedies code excludes an interlocutory appeal “in

a suit brought under the Family Code.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(7). We,

therefore, lack jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal. See CHEK Invs., L.L.C. v. L.R., 260

S.W.3d 704, 707 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (no jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal of

denial of special appearance in divorce proceeding).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

/Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE

181229F.P05

–2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

PETER SWART, Appellant On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-01229-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DF-16-24538. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. NORA MORALES, Appellee Justices Myers and Osborne participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.

It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.

Judgment entered this 10th day of April 2019.

–3–

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

Related

In Re Newby
266 S.W.3d 557 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Farmer v. Ben E. Keith Co.
907 S.W.2d 495 (Texas Supreme Court, 1995)
CHEK INVESTMENTS, L.L.C. v. L.R.
260 S.W.3d 704 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Peter Swart v. Nora Morales, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peter-swart-v-nora-morales-texapp-2019.