Randall Rollins v. Honorable James Jay

Opinion

Opinion issued November 18, 2010

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-10-00520-CV

———————————

Randall Rollins, Appellant

V.

The Honorable James Jay, Appellee

On Appeal from the 11th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2009-33876

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from the trial court’s purported denial on June 7, 2010, of appellant Randall Rollins’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Motion for No-Answer Default Judgment.  We lack jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

On October 1, 2010, this Court notified Rollins by letter that it appeared we lacked jurisdiction in this case because the trial court has not signed an order from which Rollins is appealing or a final judgment disposing of the case.[1]  On October 14, Rollins filed his response, contending that the trial court’s docket entry constitutes an appealable final judgment.

The general rule, with only a few exceptions that are not implicated here, is that an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment.  Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).  A docket entry does not constitute a final judgment or other written order.  See In re Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse of McAllen, Inc., 167 S.W.3d 827, 831 (Tex. 2005); Presley v. Presley, 214 S.W.3d 491, 492 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, no pet.).  Therefore, since Rollins has directed our attention only to a docket entry, he has failed to establish our jurisdiction. 

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Alcala, and Sharp.

---

[1]        The record reflects that the trial court gave notice to all parties of its intent to dismiss the case for want of prosecution.  The record does not contain the trial court’s actual dismissal.