Opinion
04-23-00832-CV
11-28-2023
EISG, Barry Esene, and Ruthie Esene, Appellants v. HOLT TEXAS LTD, Appellee
From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021-CI-13443 Christine Vasquez-Hortick, Judge Presiding.
ORDER
Beth Watkins, Justice.
The underlying dispute in this appeal involves a bill of review that sought to set aside a 2020 money judgment against appellants. An appeal of the final judgment in the bill of review is currently pending in this court in cause number 04-23-00067-CV. The notice of appeal in this case, however, challenges a post-judgment order directing the Bexar County District Clerk to release funds held in the trial court's registry. The order at issue in this appeal required the funds in question to be disbursed to a receiver appointed after the entry of the 2020 judgment challenged in the bill of review.
Generally, a direct appeal may challenge only "a final judgment or certain interlocutory orders expressly made appealable by statute." Sunnyland Dev., Inc. v. Shawn Ibrahim, Inc., 597 S.W.3d 1, 2 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2020, no pet.) (citing Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§ 51.012, 51.014(a)); see also Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). "Orders made for the purpose of enforcing or carrying into effect an already-rendered judgment generally are not final judgments or decrees, and therefore cannot be appealed." Sintim v. Larson, 489 S.W.3d 551, 556 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.); In re Doe, 397 S.W.3d 847, 849 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2013, no pet.); Qualia v. Qualia, 37 S.W.3d 128, 129 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2011, no pet.). "An appeal from a post-judgment order that is not appealable must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction." Sunnyland, 597 S.W.3d at 3; see also Lovall v. Yen, No. 14-07-00770-CV, 2008 WL 361373, at *1-2 (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 12, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal of post-judgment order that "was merely a ministerial act incident to the final judgment, providing for disbursement of funds directed by the [final] judgment, akin to a writ of execution").
The order challenged in this appeal does not appear to be either a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order. See, eg, Qualia, 37 S.W.3d at 129; Lovall, 2008 WL 361373, at *1-2. We therefore ORDER appellants to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction by December 28, 2023. If appellants do not timely file an adequate response to this order, we will dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.