Angelo Moses and Tiffany Moses v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp. Six Flags Theme Parks, Inc. Six Flags Over Texas, Inc. And Texas Flags, Ltd. ( 2017 )

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-17-00328-CV
ANGELO MOSES AND TIFFANY APPELLANTS
MOSES
V.
SIX FLAGS ENTERTAINMENT APPELLEES
CORP.; SIX FLAGS THEME
PARKS, INC.; SIX FLAGS OVER
TEXAS, INC.; AND TEXAS FLAGS,
LTD.
----------
FROM THE 96TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 096-279625-15
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellants Angelo Moses and Tiffany Moses attempt to appeal the trial
court’s denial of their motion to quash Appellees Six Flags Entertainment Corp.;
Six Flags Theme Park, Inc.; Six Flags Over Texas, Inc.; and Texas Flags, Ltd.’s
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
notices of intention to take their depositions and the trial court’s denial of their
motion for modification of local civil rule 3.11(a)(1).
By letter dated September 28, 2017, we notified Appellants of our concern
that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the trial court’s order
does not appear to be a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order. We
notified Appellants that their appeal could be dismissed based on our lack of
jurisdiction unless they or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a
response showing grounds for continuing the appeal by October 9, 2017. See
Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3.
Appellants filed a response on October 9, 2017, but did not provide us with
any basis of jurisdiction over this appeal. Instead, Appellants’ response argues
that this court has mandamus jurisdiction to review the trial court’s order.
Appellants’ petition for writ of mandamus was a separate proceeding and was
denied on September 29, 2017. In re Moses, No. 02-17-00327-CV, 2017 WL
4341840, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 29. 2017, orig. proceeding) (mem.
op.).
Because we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss
Appellants’ appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); Lehmann v. Har-Con
Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (stating that generally appeal may be
2
taken only from final judgment and that judgment is final and appealable if it
disposes of all parties and all issues).2
/s/ Bonnie Sudderth
BONNIE SUDDERTH
CHIEF JUSTICE
PANEL: SUDDERTH, C.J.; KERR and PITTMAN, JJ.
DELIVERED: November 2, 2017
2
Appellants have also filed a Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of
Appeal. This motion is rendered moot by our dismissal of the appeal for want of
jurisdiction.
3