Theresa Barnett v. David S. Crockett ( 2012 )

DISMISS; Opinion tiled November 7, 2012
In The
nf 5ppiahi
(nnrt
Ftfti! ThtrirI uf xa at Oatta
No. 05-12-01328-CV
THERESA BARNETT, Appellant
V.
DAVID S. CROCKETT AND DAVID S. CROCKETT & CO., Appellees
On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 10-00136-F
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Morris, Francis, and Murphy
Opinion By Justice Francis
By letter dated October 12, 2012, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over the appeal.
Specifically, it appears there is no final judgment. We instructed appellant to file, within ten days.
a jurisdictional brief explaining how we have jurisdiction over the appeal.
Unless an interlocutory appeal is specifically authorized by the constitution or statute, we
have jurisdiction only over appeals taken from final judgments. See Beckham Grp.. P. C v. Snider.
315 S.W.3d 244. 245 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010. no pet.). A final judgment is one that disposes of
all pending parties and claims. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).
An order denying a motion to compel discovery is an unappealable interlocutory order. See Pelt v.
State Board of Insurance. 802 S.W.2d 822. 827 (Tex. App.——Austin 1990. no writ).
Appellant filed a jurisdictional brief. In her brief she admits the case remains pending in the
trial court and that the order appealed is mterlocutorv. Alternatively, appellant contends the (‘ourt
may consider her appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus. Appellant has not filed a petition for
writ of mandamus in accordance with the rules of appellate procedure. See T13x. R. APP. P. 52.
Appellant filed a direct appeal of the trial court’s order denying her motion to compel
discovery. Because the order appellant appeals from is interlocutory, we dismiss the appeal for want
of jurisdiction .5cc TEx. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
4 a
MOLLY cIs
JUSTiCE
121328F.P05
uurt tfl
.Fift1! 1nitrtct nf Lixai ut ta1kni
JUDGMENT
THERESA BARNETT, Appellant Appeal from the 116th Judicial i)istrict Court
of Dallas County. Texas. (Tr.CtNo. 10
No. 05-12-01328-CV V. 001 36-F).
Opinion delivered by Justice Francis, Justices
DAVID S. CROCKETT AND DAVID S. Morris and Murphy, participating.
CROCKETT & CO., Appellees
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is D1SMISSEI).
It is ORDERED that appellees, David S. Crockett and David S. Crockett & Co., recover
their costs of the appeal from appellant. Theresa Barnett.
Judgment entered November 7, 2012.
MOLLY CI S
JUSTICE