Opinion
NO. 01-18-00507-CV
08-31-2018
BRADLEY BARTON, Appellant v. OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, Appellee
On Appeal from the 309th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 2017-83864
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Bradley Barton, acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal purporting to challenge a "final order" in the underlying action. But a final judgment has not been issued in the case and Barton appears to be appealing from an interlocutory order for parentage testing. This Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments and those interlocutory orders specifically authorized by statute. See Bison Bldg. Materials, Ltd. v. Aldridge, 422 S.W.3d 582, 585 (Tex. 2012); CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444, 447-48 (Tex. 2011); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014 (authorizing appeals from certain interlocutory orders). In this case, the order appellant seeks to appeal is not final because it did not dispose of all claims and parties, and an interlocutory appeal of the order is not authorized. See CMH Homes, 340 S.W.3d at 447.
The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that this appeal was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless he filed a response demonstrating that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. Appellant failed to respond.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Caughey.