From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crain v. Cecil

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Mar 7, 2012
No. 10-12-00078-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 7, 2012)

Opinion

No. 10-12-00078-CV

03-07-2012

STEVEN CHRISTOPHER CRAIN, Appellant v. TINA MARIE CECIL, CHARLES GREGORY CECIL, CHASTITY PARK AND CASTLE HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT, Appellees


From the 52nd District Court

Coryell County, Texas

Trial Court No. COT-1140759


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Steven Christopher Cain is attempting to appeal from the trial court's February 16, 2012 order declaring him a vexatious litigant and requiring that he post security in the amount of $15,000 by April 9, 2012. The Order states that failure to pay the required security will result in dismissal of the litigation as to the named defendants.

Appellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments and only those interlocutory orders deemed appealable by the Texas Legislature. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); James v. Brown, 2009 Tex. App. Lexis 306 (Tex. App.-Dallas January 16, 2009, no pet.). See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014 (West 2008). A judgment is final for purposes of appeal if it disposes of all pending parties and claims in the record, except as necessary to carry out the decree. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d at 195.

Because there is no order of dismissal or final judgment on the merits and there is no statutory exception allowing Crain to appeal the interlocutory order, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 7, 2012

[CV06]


Summaries of

Crain v. Cecil

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Mar 7, 2012
No. 10-12-00078-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 7, 2012)
Case details for

Crain v. Cecil

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN CHRISTOPHER CRAIN, Appellant v. TINA MARIE CECIL, CHARLES GREGORY…

Court:TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Date published: Mar 7, 2012

Citations

No. 10-12-00078-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 7, 2012)

Citing Cases

Nunu v. Risk

It is well-established that no statute authorizes an interlocutory appeal from an order declaring a person to…