Court Opinion

ID: 3088105
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 03:21:10.736854+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:43:08.902128
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-13-00486-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
___________________________________________________________

ANTHONY W. SPENCER,                                                          Appellant,

                                            v.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       Appellee,
____________________________________________________________

       On appeal from the United States District Court for the
        Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
      Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza
                   Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Anthony Spencer, proceeding pro se, attempted to perfect an appeal

from an order entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of

Texas, Corpus Christi Division, in civil cause number 2:13-CV-79. On September 10,

2013, the Court of this Court notified appellant that it did not appear that this Court has

jurisdiction over the appeal. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §22.220 (West Supp. 2011).

The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to

correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3.    Appellant was
advised that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction if the defect was not

corrected.

       On September 16, 2013, appellant filed a response to the Court’s notice asserting

that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal because it arises from a court in Nueces

County and the amount in controversy is $8,000.00.

       In terms of appellate jurisdiction, each court of appeals has appellate jurisdiction

over all civil cases within its district, of which the district courts or county courts have

jurisdiction, when the amount in controversy or the judgment rendered exceeds $250,

exclusive of interest and costs. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 22.220. In this case, the

order appealed from was not from a district or county court, rather it was an order issued

by the United States Southern District Court. We are without jurisdiction over the federal

courts. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 22.220(a); see also Cuellar v. Livingston, No.

03-13-00304-CV, 2013 WL 4516142, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 22, 2013, no pet.)

(mem. op.); Sanchez v. Lucio, No. 13-10-00227-CV, 2010 WL 2862601, at *1 (Tex.

App.—Corpus Christi July 22, 2010, pet. denied) (per curiam mem. op.).

       Appellate jurisdiction is never presumed.       Brashear v. Victoria Gardens of

McKinney, L.L.C., 302 S.W.3d 542, 546 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.). The Court,

having examined and fully considered the documents on file and appellant’s response to

this Court=s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of

jurisdiction.   Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF

JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

                                                               PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
3rd day of October, 2013.

                                             2