Tadele Dametie v. Charlotte-Marie Callins

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 18, 2021
Docket05-21-00116-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Tadele Dametie v. Charlotte-Marie Callins (Tadele Dametie v. Charlotte-Marie Callins) 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
Tadele Dametie v. Charlotte-Marie Callins, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed August 18, 2021

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00116-CV

TADELE DAMETIE, Appellant V. CHARLOTTE-MARIE CALLINS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-09479

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Smith Opinion by Chief Justice Burns We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal because there did not appear

to be a final judgment or other appealable interlocutory order. See Lehmann v. Har–

Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (generally appellate courts have

jurisdiction over final judgments or certain interlocutory orders permitted by

statute); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a) (listing appealable

interlocutory orders). We instructed appellant to file a letter brief and cautioned her

that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. As

of today’s date, appellant has not responded. Appellee sued five defendants. By orders signed on September 29, 2020 and

October 27, 2020, the trial court granted default judgment against four of the

defendants, including appellant.1 Appellee’s claims against Santiago Real Estate

Investors, however, remain pending in the trial court. Because claims remain

pending in the underlying lawsuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

/Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

210116F.P05

1 In her notice of appeal, appellant states she is appealing from the trial court’s January 26, 2021 order denying her motion to reinstate. –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

TADELE DAMETIE, Appellant On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-21-00116-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-09479. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice CHARLOTTE-MARIE CALLINS, Burns. Justices Molberg and Smith Appellee participating.

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

It is ORDERED that appellee CHARLOTTE-MARIE CALLINS recover her costs of this appeal from appellant TADELE DAMETIE.

Judgment entered August 18, 2021

–3–

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)
Tadele Dametie v. Charlotte-Marie Callins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tadele-dametie-v-charlotte-marie-callins-texapp-2021.