Court Opinion

ID: 9907835
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-07 09:10:07.435117+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:08:17.904428
License: Public Domain

In The
                               Court of Appeals
                      Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

                                    No. 07-23-00273-CV

                       PAUL RAYMOND CASTILLO, APPELLANT

                                             V.

                            MELANIE CASTILLO, APPELLEE

                          On Appeal from the 456th District Court
                                 Guadalupe County, Texas
           Trial Court No. 21-0610-CV-E, Honorable Heather H. Wright, Presiding

                                   November 30, 2023
                             MEMORANDUM OPINION
                   Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.

       Appellant, Paul Raymond Castillo, and Appellee, Melanie Castillo, were divorced

in 2021. Two years later, Paul filed a post-judgment petition to partition their jointly owned

real property. On May 31, 2023, the trial court signed a judgment partitioning the property.

However, on June 26, 2023, the trial court granted Melanie’s timely filed a motion for new
trial. Paul has filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s Order Granting New Trial.1

We dismiss the purported appeal for want of jurisdiction.

        We have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a final judgment or from an

interlocutory order made immediately appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con

Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Stary v. DeBord, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352–53 (Tex.

1998) (per curiam). When a trial court grants a new trial, the order has the legal effect of

vacating the trial court’s original judgment and returning the case to the trial docket as

though there had been no previous trial or hearing. Markowitz v. Markowitz, 118 S.W.3d

82, 88 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (op. on reh’g). Consequently,

once a new trial is granted, there is no final judgment from which an appeal may be

prosecuted. Wade v. Deere Credit Servs., No. 07-04-00067-CV, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS

2569, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 23, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op). Further, an order

granting a new trial is not appealable by interlocutory appeal. See Harris Cty. Appraisal

Dist. v. Crossview Partners., Ltd., No. 01-22-00155-CV, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 3920, at

*4–5 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 8, 2023, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal

from order granting a new trial for want of jurisdiction).

        By letter of October 26, 2023, we notified Paul that it did not appear we have

jurisdiction over the appeal because the trial court’s Order Granting New Trial vacated

the final judgment and is not an appealable interlocutory order. We directed Paul to show

grounds for continuing the appeal by November 6, 2023, or we would dismiss the appeal

for want of jurisdiction. Paul has not responded to our letter to date.

        1 Originally appealed to the Fourth Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by

the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.
                                                    2
      Because there is no final judgment or appealable order presented for review, we

dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

                                                       Per Curiam

                                            3