Luther W. Cobb, Sr v. Joseph Campbell ( 2020 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-20-00037-CV
Luther W. Cobb, Sr., Appellant
v.
Joseph Campbell, Appellee
FROM THE 264TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
NO. 310,732-D, THE HONORABLE PAUL L. LEPAK, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Luther W. Cobb, Sr., acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal in December 2019,
from the trial court’s denial of his motion for appointment of an attorney ad litem. The clerk’s
record contains the trial court’s order denying Cobb’s motion to appoint attorney ad litem, but
that order is not subject to interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014
(listing interlocutory orders that may be appealed).
On February 4, 2020, the Clerk of this Court advised Cobb that it appears that this
Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter because this Court’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals in
which there exists a final or appealable judgment or order which has been signed by a judge. See
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (explaining that “general rule, with
a few mostly statutory exceptions, is that an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”);
McKinnon v. Wallin, No. 03-18-00612-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 552, at *4 (Tex. App.—
Austin Jan. 30, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal because appellant failed to identify
final judgment or appealable order that would support court’s jurisdiction). The Clerk requested
that Cobb file a response by February 14, 2020, explaining how this Court may exercise
jurisdiction over this appeal and advised him that the failure to do so would result in the
dismissal of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
In response, Cobb filed a letter with this Court on February 12, 2020, in which he
states that his notice of appeal is premature and references an “Objection and Motion for
Rehearing: Continuance.” He also filed a motion to stay the trial court proceedings. In this
motion, Cobb seems to be arguing that the final decree of divorce between Cobb and his ex-wife
in trial court cause number 261,263-D was void because “someone lined through 266,263-D and
wrote 261,263-D.” The underlying case in this appeal, however, concerns Joseph Campbell’s
petition for termination and adoption of stepchild that was filed in July 2019 in trial court cause
number 310-732-D.1
Cobb has failed to identify a final judgment or appealable order in the underlying
case that supports this Court’s jurisdiction. Because Cobb has not explained how this Court may
exercise jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction and deny his
motion to stay the trial court proceeding. 2
1
The child’s mother, who was Cobb’s ex-wife, initially also was a petitioner, but she is
deceased. According to the petition, Campbell is the child’s stepfather and was married to
Cobb’s ex-wife.
2
On this same date, this Court has dismissed Cobb’s related appeals in this Court’s
cause numbers 03-20-00034-CV, 03-20-00035-CV, and 03-20-00036-CV.
2
__________________________________________
Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Kelly, and Smith
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: February 20, 2020
3