Court Opinion

ID: 9375276
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-27 08:09:53.484143+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:57.467776
License: Public Domain

In the
                    Court of Appeals
            Second Appellate District of Texas
                     at Fort Worth
                  ___________________________
                       No. 02-22-00476-CV
                  ___________________________

                JERALD H. MILLER, JR., Appellant

                                   V.

CITY OF FORT WORTH, FORT WORTH INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,
 TARRANT COUNTY COLLEGE DISTRICT, TARRANT COUNTY HOSPITAL
   DISTRICT, TARRANT COUNTY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT, AND
                  TARRANT COUNTY, Appellees

               On Appeal from the 348th District Court
                       Tarrant County, Texas
                   Trial Court No. 348-325467-21

            Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J.
                  Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

       Appellant Jerald H. Miller, Jr. filed a notice of appeal “seek[ing] to alter the trial

court’s substantive and/or constructive denial” of his motion for continuance and for

consolidation. Miller’s notice stated that the order was signed on September 2, 2022.

The order attached to his notice was an order re-setting the case for trial. Although

that order was signed on September 9, 2022, we assume that it is the order from

which he attempts to appeal.

       Because the order did not appear to be a final judgment or appealable

interlocutory order, we were concerned that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal.

We contacted the trial court clerk, who informed us that the trial judge had not signed

a final order or an order subject to appeal. We then notified Miller of our

jurisdictional concern and warned him that we would dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response

showing grounds for continuing it. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3.

       Miller filed a request for an extension of time to file a response. We granted

that request, but Miller did not file a response.

       We have jurisdiction to consider appeals only from final judgments and from

certain interlocutory orders made immediately appealable by statute. See Lehmann v.

Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); see, e.g., Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code

Ann. § 51.014. Because there does not appear to be a final judgment or appealable

                                             2
interlocutory order in this case, we do not have jurisdiction over Miller’s appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

                                                   Per Curiam

Delivered: February 23, 2023

                                        3