Court Opinion

ID: 9387819
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-19 06:07:40.095683+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:15.674551
License: Public Domain

VACATE and DISMISS and Opinion Filed April 11, 2023

                                      S  In The
                             Court of Appeals
                      Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 No. 05-22-01162-CV

                    IN THE INTEREST OF O.E.S., A CHILD

                On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court
                             Dallas County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. DF-20-13200

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
      Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Pedersen, III, and Justice Goldstein
                         Opinion by Chief Justice Burns
      The trial court signed a default judgment in the underlying lawsuit on

November 12, 2020.        Appellant filed a motion seeking to vacate the default

judgment in March 2022 that was denied following a hearing before an associate

judge. Following a de novo hearing, the trial court signed an order adopting the

associate judge’s order on October 26, 2022. Appellant appeals from this order.

Because it appeared the trial court lacked plenary power when it signed the

appealed order, we questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal and directed

appellant to file a letter brief addressing the jurisdictional issue.

      Judicial action taken after the expiration of the court’s plenary power is a

nullity, and any orders signed outside the trial court’s plenary jurisdiction are
void. See Malone v. Hampton, 182 S.W.3d 465, 468 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, no

pet.). We have no jurisdiction to consider the merits of an appeal from a void

order. See Freedom Commc’ns, Inc. v. Coronado, 372 S.W.3d 621, 623 (Tex.

2012). When a party appeals a void order, we must declare the order void and

dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See State ex rel. Latty v. Owens, 907

S.W.2d 484, 486 (Tex. 1995).

      Because appellant did not file a motion for new trial or motion to modify

within thirty days of the signing of the default judgment, the trial court’s plenary

power over the judgment expired on December 12, 2020. See TEX. RS. CIV. P.

329b(a) (motion for new trial due within thirty days after judgment is signed);

329b(d) (trial court retains plenary power over judgment for thirty days after

judgment is signed). Consequently, the associate judge’s and the appealed order of

the trial court were signed after the trial court’s plenary power expired. Although

appellant filed a letter brief, he addressed the merits of the appeal instead of the

jurisdictional issue – our jurisdiction over an order signed after the expiration of

the trial court’s plenary power.

      For reasons stated above, the appealed order is void. Accordingly, we

vacate the trial court’s October 26, 2022 order and dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction. See Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486.

                                              /Robert D. Burns, III/
                                              ROBERT D. BURNS, III
221162F.P05                                   CHIEF JUSTICE

                                        –2–
                                  S
                           Court of Appeals
                    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                  JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF O.E.S., A                 On Appeal from the 256th Judicial
CHILD                                        District Court, Dallas County, Texas
                                             Trial Court Cause No. DF-20-13200.
No. 05-22-01162-CV                           Opinion delivered by Chief Justice
                                             Burns. Justices Pedersen, III and
                                             Goldstein participating.

      In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial
court’s October 26, 2022 order and DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

      We ORDER appellees, The State of Texas and Sahira Gelanie Taveras
Santana, recover their costs of this appeal from appellant, Orlando David Santana.

Judgment entered April 11, 2023

                                       –3–