Court Opinion

ID: 9906862
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-05 15:24:55.093542+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:16.892036
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                      San Antonio, Texas
                                  MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                         No. 04-23-00661-CV

                                             Craig DAVIS,
                                               Appellant

                                                   v.

                             FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SONORA,
                                         Appellee

                     From the 451st Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas
                                        Trial Court No. 21-632
                             Honorable Kirsten Cohoon, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting:          Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
                  Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
                  Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 29, 2023

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

           On June 30, 2023, appellant filed a notice of appeal stating his intent to appeal a June 1,

2023 order granting appellee’s motion for summary judgment against appellant. The clerk’s record

reveals the June 1, 2023 order is interlocutory as claims remain pending in the trial court. The

order also does not contain definite language of finality. “[A]n appeal may be prosecuted only

from a final judgment.” N.E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966); see

also Shockome v. Brendel, No. 03-19-00813-CV, 2020 WL 579570, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin

Feb. 6, 2020, no pet.) (“Based on the record before us, it appears that the trial court has not yet
                                                                                      04-23-00661-CV

rendered a final judgment, and no statute authorizes an interlocutory appeal from the . . . denial of

a motion for default judgment.”).

        Because no final order or judgment has been entered in the underlying case, on November

6, 2023, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed

for lack of jurisdiction. On November 15, 2023, appellant filed a written response that failed to

establish the existence of our jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal for

lack of jurisdiction.

                                                  PER CURIAM

                                                -2-