From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. Snow

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Dec 13, 2022
No. 05-22-00873-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 13, 2022)

Opinion

05-22-00873-CV

12-13-2022

DAVID LEE DANIELS III, Appellant v. KATINA SNOW, CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY, ATWORK GROUP,NANCY DELGADO, JAZMINE WELLS CASTILLO, MARITZA DEJESUS, MARIA CARRILLO, AMANDA ALVEY, ANDKR YOUNG STAFFING TX557, Appellees


On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-22-05096

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Goldstein

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROBERT D. BURNS, III, CHIEF JUSTICE

We questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal from the trial court's August 18, 2022 dismissal order as it did not appear the order disposed of all parties and claims or that the order was otherwise appealable. See Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (appeal may only be taken from final judgments that dispose of all parties and claims or interlocutory orders authorized by statute). As reflected in the record, appellant filed the underlying suit against Katina Snow, Child Support Agency, AtWork Group, Nancy Delgado, Jazmine Wells Castillo, Maritza De Jesus, Maria Carrillo, Amanda Alvey, and KR Young Staffing TX557. The appealed order dismissed the claims against KR Young Staffing, AtWork Group, Delgado, Castillo, De Jesus, Carrillo, and Alvey by granting their Rule 91a motion, see Tex. R. Civ. P. 91a (concerning baseless causes of action), but did not address the claims against Snow and the Child Support Agency. Although we directed appellant to file a letter brief addressing our concern and cautioned appellant that failure to comply could result in the appeal being dismissed, see Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a),(c), more than ten days have passed and appellant has not complied. Accordingly, on the record before us, we dismiss the appeal. See id. 42.3(a); see also Koenig v. Blaylock, 497 S.W.3d 595, 598 n.4 (Tex. App.-Austin 2016, pet. denied) (noting no statute authorizes interlocutory appeal from order denying Rule 91a motion).

JUDGMENT

In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered December 13, 2022.


Summaries of

Daniels v. Snow

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Dec 13, 2022
No. 05-22-00873-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 13, 2022)
Case details for

Daniels v. Snow

Case Details

Full title:DAVID LEE DANIELS III, Appellant v. KATINA SNOW, CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Dec 13, 2022

Citations

No. 05-22-00873-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 13, 2022)