Court Opinion

ID: 9950944
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-15 07:17:01.622425+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:52.075396
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                             __________________

                             NO. 09-24-00001-CV
                             __________________

                       BRADLEY YOUNG, Appellant

                                        V.

SELENE FINANCE LP, AS MORTGAGE SERVICER FOR MCLP ASSET
    COMPANY, INC., THE CURRENT MORTGAGEE, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

               On Appeal from the 457th District Court
                     Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 23-12-19135-CV
__________________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      On December 29, 2023, Bradley Young filed a notice of appeal in Trial Cause

Number 23-12-19135-CV. The notice of appeal complained that on Friday,

December 29, 2023, Young had been unable to locate a judge to sign a temporary

restraining order to prevent a non-judicial foreclosure sale on Tuesday, January 2,

2024. We notified the parties that the notice of appeal did not identify a final

judgment or an appealable order, and we warned the parties that the appeal would

                                        1
be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction unless the Court received a response showing a

ground for continuing the appeal.

      Generally, in civil cases appellate courts review only final judgments and

interlocutory orders specifically made appealable by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con

Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). An appeal from an interlocutory order may

proceed as an accelerated appeal “when allowed by statute[.]” See Tex. R. App. P.

28.1. We granted an extension of time until February 9, 2024, to file a response, but

Young failed to file a response or identify a final judgment or a written order from

which an appeal is authorized by law. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction. See id. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

      APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                                          PER CURIAM

Submitted on March 13, 2024
Opinion Delivered March 14, 2024

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.

                                             2