eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2009-01

James Carlan A/K/A James Taylor v. Jo Gutheridge Stokes ( 2009 )


Menu:
  • Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 29, 2009

    Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 29, 2009.

     

     

     

    In The

     

    Fourteenth Court of Appeals

    ____________

     

    NO. 14-08-00943-CV

    ____________

     

    JAMES CARLAN a/k/a JAMES TAYLOR, Appellant

     

    V.

     

    JO GUTHERIDGE STOKES, Appellee

     

      

     

    On Appeal from the 245th District Court

    Harris  County , Texas

    Trial Court Cause No. 2008-45464

     

      

     

    M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N

    Appellant filed a notice of appeal from an order signed September 5, 2008, sustaining a contest to his pauper=s oath.  According to the notice of appeal, no final judgment has been entered in this case, and appellant is attempting to appeal the denial of pauper status for pending divorce action.

    Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments.  Lehmann v. Har‑Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).  Interlocutory orders may be appealed only if permitted by statute.  Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). 

    There is no statute providing for an interlocutory appeal of the court=s ruling on indigency for trial proceedings.  Lomax v. Thomas, No. 14-08-00163-CV, 2008 WL 4308610, *1 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] Aug. 28, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.).  Thus, an order denying indigent status may not be appealed before entry of final judgment.  In contrast, a trial court=s indigency ruling pertaining to an already pending appeal is appealable.  See In re Arroyo, 988 S.W.2d 737, 738‑39 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding). 

    On December 15, 2008, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court=s intention to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal on or before December 29, 2008.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).  No response has been filed.

    We are without jurisdiction over this appeal.  Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

     

    PER CURIAM

     

    Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Anderson and Seymore.