Opinion
02-22-00009-CV
05-26-2022
Scott Bernstein, Appellant v. Ranger Energy Services, LLC; Cudd Pressure Control, Inc.;Bronco Oilfield Services, Inc.; Patterson Services, Inc.; PCS Ferguson, Inc.; Select Energy Services, LLC; Bell Supply Company, LLC; and NCS Multistage, LLC, Appellees
On Appeal from the 43rd District Court Parker County, Texas Trial Court No. CV21-0139.
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Brian Walker, Justice
In this oilfield contract dispute, Appellees sued Appellant Scott Bernstein, JBL Oil & Gas Operating, LLC (JBL), and multiple other companies and mineral interest owners (Other Parties), seeking damages for alleged unpaid-for services and equipment used to construct two gas wells. Another company-Texas Energy and Equipment, LLP (TEE)-then intervened in the suit and pleaded against JBL similar contractual claims related to one of the wells. After all Other Parties were either adjudged in default or nonsuited, Appellees obtained summary judgments against Bernstein and JBL.
TEE also filed a motion for summary judgment against JBL, but the record does not show that the trial court ruled on this motion.
Bernstein seeks to appeal certain of the trial court's orders granting summary judgment. However, the appellate record does not contain any order that finally disposes of the claims raised by TEE in its petition for intervention. We notified Bernstein on March 7, 2022, and again on May 3, 2022, of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction to consider his appeal because TEE's claims remain pending. Both notices informed Bernstein that he had ten days to respond and show grounds for continuing the appeal or it might be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. We received no such response from Bernstein or any other party.
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 also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a). A final judgment is one that disposes of every pending claim and party. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 205. Unless a statutory exception applies, an order that does not dispose of all pending parties and claims remains interlocutory and unappealable until a final judgment is signed. See id.
Because TEE's claims remain pending, the orders from which Bernstein attempts to appeal are not final judgments, nor are they appealable interlocutory orders. See id.; see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a). Thus, we dismiss Bernstein's appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).