From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Tx. Dept. F.P.S.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin
Nov 5, 2010
No. 03-10-00624-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 5, 2010)

Opinion

No. 03-10-00624-CV

Filed: November 5, 2010.

Appealed from the District Court of Travis County, 126th Judicial District, No. D-1-GN-08-001528, Honorable Lora J. Livingston, Judge Presiding.

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction.

Before Chief Justice JONES, Justices PATTERSON and HENSON.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Appellant Trent Davis, appearing pro se, seeks to appeal from the trial court's order granting his trial counsel's agreed motion to withdraw. This Court's jurisdiction is limited to the review of final judgments and certain interlocutory orders signed by the trial court. See Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ann. § 51.012 (West Supp. 2010), § 51.014 (West 2008); see also Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A trial court's order granting a motion to withdraw is not an appealable interlocutory order. See Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014. No appealable judgment or order appears in the record. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

The trial court's order includes the following notation: "Plaintiff never consented or authorized representation by [trial counsel] according to Plaintiff. [Trial counsel] at all times believed it was acting with proper authority, according to the firm."


Summaries of

Davis v. Tx. Dept. F.P.S.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin
Nov 5, 2010
No. 03-10-00624-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 5, 2010)
Case details for

Davis v. Tx. Dept. F.P.S.

Case Details

Full title:Trent Davis, Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin

Date published: Nov 5, 2010

Citations

No. 03-10-00624-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 5, 2010)

Citing Cases

In re Lugo

Here, not only is there no signed order granting the motion to withdraw, a trial court's order granting a…

In re K.L.

On June 28, 2017, we sent a letter to Father expressing our concern that we may not have jurisdiction over…