Stephen Eichelsdorfer, D.P.M. v. Sidney Hollis and Angie Hollis

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 19, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-13-00009-CV

STEPHEN EICHELSDORFER, D.P.M., Appellant V.

SIDNEY HOLLIS AND ANGIE HOLLIS, Appellees

On Appeal from the 269th District Court Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-21125

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. The trial court simultaneously granted plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 74.351(c).

The denial of a motion to dismiss, coupled with the grant of an extension of time to cure a timely but deficient expert report, are inseparable for purposes of an

2

appeal. Ogletree v. Matthews, 262 S.W.3d 316, 321 (Tex. 2007). In such cases, the Legislature's prohibition on appealing extension orders precludes an interlocutory appeal. Id.

On January 30, 2013, the court notified the parties of its intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. Both sides have filed a response. Appellant’s response fails to demonstrate that this court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Busby.