DISMISS and Opinion Filed December 21, 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 23
- 00967
- CV IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF RICHARD LEON MEAN KINS

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR
- 23
- 03429
- 2 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida

- Kipness, Pedersen, III, and Garcia

Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III Appellant filed the underlying suit seeking temporary and permanent guardian ship of her father. Although t he trial court has yet to rule on the request for permanent guardianship and the record before us reflects a motion for guardian ad litem is pending, appellant has appealed the following orders: (1) order authorizing the admin istrative assistant in the O ffice of Court Investigation to obtain protected information for use by the assigned court investigator, ( 2 ) order appointing a court investigator and authorizing the court investigator full access to information , (3 ) order deny ing appellant’s request for appointment of c ounsel, (4) order appointing

an attorney ad litem for appellant’s father , (5) order dismissing “as expired” the– 2

–

application for temporary guardianship a nd authorizing the attorney ad litem to file an application for fee s , and (6) order approving the attorney ad litem’s motion for fees and continuing the appointment. Because the orders are not appealable, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(a). It is well

- settled that an appeal may generally only be ta ken from a final judgment that disposes of all claims and parties

. See Lehmann v. Har

- Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). However, b ecause probate and guardianship cases generally consist of a continuing series of events, and decisions made later in the proceedings may be based on decisions made earlier in the proceedings, a judgment
i n a probate or guardianship proceeding is deemed final even when other issues remain pending if (a) a statute expressly declares the phase of the probate proceeding
i n which the judgment is rendered to be final and appealable or (b) the judgment adjudicates a substantial right and disposes of all issues and parties in the phase of the proceeding in which it is rendered such that it would be properly severable. See
De Ayala v. Mackie , 193 S.W.3d 575, 578 (Tex. 2006) (quoting Crowson v. Wakeham , 897 S.W.2d 779, 783 (Tex. 1995)) ; Logan v. McDaniel , 21 S.W.3d 683, 688 (Tex. App.

— Austin 2000, pet. denied) ; see also Guar. Fed. Sav. Bank v. Horsehoe Operating Co. , 793 S.W.2d 652, 658 (Tex.1990) (claim is properly severable if controversy involve s more than one cause of action, severed claim could be proper subject of independently asserted lawsuit; and severed claim is not so– 3

–

interwoven with the remaining claims that the claim s involve the same facts and issues

. ”). Because neither circumstance appeared to apply here, w e questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal and directed appellant to file a letter brief addressing

our concern . Appellant complied, but her response addresses the circumstances that
warrant review of the trial court’s orders 1 rather than the question of the appealability of the orders

. N o statute authorizes the appeal of any of the challenged orders , and the orders do not adjudicate a substantial right or dispose of all claims and parties in the phase of the proceeding in which they were rendered such that they would be properly severable

. See Guar. Fed. Sav. Bank , 793 S.W.2d at 658. Therefore, we l ack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal and all pending motions

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3( a ).

230967f.p05

1 Additionally, appellant motions for a trial by jury, appointment of counsel, and appointment of special master. /Bill Pedersen, III/ / BILL PEDERSEN, III JUSTICE– 4

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF RICHARD LEON MEANKINS No. 05

- 23

- 00967

- CV On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR

- 23

- 03429

- 2. Opinion delivered by Justice Pedersen, III. Justices Partida

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

. Judgment entered this 21 st day of December , 2023

.