Court Opinion

ID: 4432106
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-08-22 14:14:31.866959+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:19.889572
License: Public Domain

In The

                        Court of Appeals

               Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                       __________________

                        NO. 09-19-00216-CV
                        __________________

                  BENITA BERGMAN, Appellant

                                V.

 KENDRICK SKIPPER D/B/A CHICK-FIL-A AT MAGNOLIA, Appellee

                        __________________

                        NO. 09-19-00217-CV
                        __________________

                  BENITA BERGMAN, Appellant

                                V.

                   CHICK-FIL-A, INC., Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 284th District Court
                     Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 18-07-09536-CV
__________________________________________________________________

                                1
                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Benita Bergman filed notices of appeal from the trial court’s orders

granting summary judgment in favor of appellees. In each cause, the appellees filed

a motion to dismiss the appeals, in which the appellees assert that the orders are not

appealable because (1) claims against other parties remain unresolved and (2) the

orders do not contain unmistakable language of finality.

      A judgment is not final “unless it actually disposes of every pending claim

and party or unless it clearly and unequivocally states that it disposes of all claims

and all parties.” Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 205 (Tex. 2001). We

lack jurisdiction over appeals from interlocutory orders unless a statute specifically

authorizes an appeal. See, e.g., Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014 (West

Supp. 2018). We conclude that the trial court’s orders do not dispose of all parties

and claims, and they do not contain unequivocal language indicating that the trial

court intended its orders to be final. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 205-06. We lack

jurisdiction over these appeals, and we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

      APPEALS DISMISSED.

                                                     _________________________
                                                         LEANNE JOHNSON
                                                               Justice
Submitted on August 21, 2019
Opinion Delivered August 22, 2019
Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
                                          2