### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03
- 20
- 00 034
- CV

Luther W. Cobb, Sr. , Appellant

v. Joseph Campbell , Appellee

FROM THE 264 TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. 261,263
- D , THE HONORABLE PAUL L. LEPAK , JUDGE PRESIDING

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

Luther W. Co bb, Sr. , acting p ro se, filed a notic e of appeal in January 2020 , but he does not iden tify an appealable order or final judgment tha t he is appealing from in the notice

. H e references “ the mot ion ‘ request continuanc e . ’ ”

On F ebruary 4, 20 2 0 , the Clerk of this Court advised Cobb that it appears that this Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter because this C ourt ’ s jurisd iction is limited to appeals in which there exists a final or appeal able judgmen t or order which has been signed by a judge. S ee L ehman n v. Har

- Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (explaining that “ ge neral rule , with a few mostly statutory exceptions , is that an appeal m ay be taken only from a final judgment ” ) ; McKinnon v. Wall in , No. 03

- 18

- 00 612

- 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 appe alab le order that would support court ’ s ju risdiction)

. The Cl er k req uested2

that Cobb file a response by February 14 , 2020 , explaining how this Court may exer cise jurisdiction over this appeal and advised him that the failure to do so would result in the dism issal of this appeal. See Te x. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

In response, Cobb filed a le tter with this Court on February 12, 20 2 0 , in which he states tha t his notice of appeal is premature and refere nces a “ Reply and Motion for Rehearing
f or Appointment of Attorney Ad Lite m. ” He also filed a motion to stay the trial court
pr oceedings. In t h is motion , Cobb seems to be arg uing that the fi nal decree of d ivorce be tween Cobb and his ex

- wife was void because “ someone lined th rough 266,263

- D and wrote 261,263

- D

. ” The clerk ’ s rec ord c on tains the final decree of divorce sh owing the cause number of 2 66,263

- D struck through and 261,263

- D hand

- written in its place as the cause number

. Th e
t rial court signed this decree on February 18, 2014, and the decree reflects that Cobb appear ed by telephone for the final hearing in November 2 013.

The und erly ing case in this appeal , howev er, con cerns Joseph C ampbell ’ s petition that was filed in July 2019 to modify the parent

- c hild relationship be tween Cobb and his child

. 1
Cobb has failed to identify a final judgment or appealable order in the u nderly ing case t hat support s this Court ’ s jurisdiction. Because Cobb has not explained how this Court may exer cise juris diction over this appeal , we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction and d eny his motion to stay the trial court pro cee ding

. 2

1 Accordin g to the affidavit t hat Camp bell filed in support of his p etition, he is the child ’ s step father . He was marr ied to Co bb ’ s ex - wife , wh o is deceased and was the ch ild ’ s m other

.

2 On th is same date, this Court has dismissed Co bb ’ s related appeals in this Court ’ s cause numbers 03

- 20

- 0003 5

- CV , 03

- 2 0

- 0003 6

- CV , and 03

- 20

- 00037

- CV

.3 _______________ ___________________________ Melissa Good win , Justice Before Justices Goodwin, Kelly , and S mith Dismissed for Wa nt of Jurisdictio n Fil ed: February 20, 2020