Court Opinion

ID: 9947123
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-02 18:13:10.566624+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:47.538310
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-23-00534-CV

                              COURT OF APPEALS

                    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                      CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 ESTATE OF ELDA M. VILLA A/K/A MARIA ELDA VILLA, DECEASED.

                       On appeal from the Probate Court
                          of Hidalgo County, Texas.

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

 Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina
              Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tjierina

       On December 4, 2023, appellants Robin Villa and Ruben Villa filed a notice of

appeal from an “Order Granting Motion to Set Aside Admissions” signed on November 7,

2023. On December 7, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants that it appeared

that they were attempting to appeal an order which is not subject to appeal. The Clerk

requested correction of this defect, if possible, and advised appellants that the appeal

would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days. See TEX. R. APP. P.

37.1, 42.3(a), (c). Appellants did not respond to the Clerk’s notice.
       “Courts are empowered to note potential jurisdictional defects sua sponte,” and by

doing so, a court “discharges its duty to ensure that the court itself is functioning in an

authorized and proper[] judicial capacity.” Hidalgo Cnty. Water Improvement Dist. No. 3

v. Hidalgo Cnty. Irrigation Dist. No. 1, 669 S.W.3d 178, 185 (Tex. 2023) (quoting Rattray

v. City of Brownsville, 662 S.W.3d 860, 867, 869 (Tex. 2023)). Thus, as an appellate

court, we have the obligation to examine our jurisdiction and may do so sua sponte. See

Pike v. Tex. EMC Mgmt., LLC, 610 S.W.3d 763, 774 (Tex. 2020); M.O. Dental Lab v.

Rape, 139 S.W.3d 671, 673 (Tex. 2004) (per curiam). Generally, appeals may be taken

only from final judgments. CPS Energy v. Elec. Reliability Council of Tex., 671 S.W.3d

605, 614 (Tex. 2023); Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).

Statutes that specifically authorize interlocutory appeals provide an exception to this

general rule. Bonsmara Nat. Beef Co., LLC v. Hart of Tex. Cattle Feeders, LLC, 603

S.W.3d 385, 390 (Tex. 2020); City of Watauga v. Gordon, 434 S.W.3d 586, 588 (Tex.

2014); see, e.g., TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014 (listing several interlocutory

orders that may be appealed).

       The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and the

applicable law, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Appellants have

not shown that they are appealing from a final judgment or that their appeal is otherwise

authorized by statute. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

                                                                JAIME TIJERINA
                                                                Justice

Delivered and filed on the
29th day of February, 2024.

                                             2