From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ford v. Boston

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Feb 5, 2004
No. 09-03-508 CV (Tex. App. Feb. 5, 2004)

Opinion

No. 09-03-508 CV.

Opinion Delivered February 5, 2004.

On Appeal from the 411th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. Civ 20318.

APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.

Kenneth Ford, Pro Se — Huntsville for Appellant.

Cari G. Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, Law Enforcement Defense Division — Austin for Appellee.

Before McKEITHEN, C.J., BURGESS and GAULTNEY, JJ.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


On October 29, 2003, the Court received the notice of appeal in this appeal. On November 13, 2003, we notified the parties that the appeal appeared to be interlocutory because the final judgment had not been signed by the trial court. On December 29, 2003, we received the clerk's record and confirmed no judgment has been signed and entered. We have received no written response to our correspondence.

The Court finds no final judgment has issued. Subject to certain statutory exceptions not applicable in this case, only final judgments are appealable. TEX. CIV. PRAC. REM. CODE ANN. § 51.012, 51.014 (Vernon 1997 Supp. 2004). A prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the day of, but after, the event that begins the period for perfecting the appeal. Tex.R.App.P. 27.1(a). In this case, however, the act which will begin the period for perfecting the appeal-signing the judgment-has not occurred. Accordingly, we hold the jurisdiction over this case is still vested in the trial court. This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


Summaries of

Ford v. Boston

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Feb 5, 2004
No. 09-03-508 CV (Tex. App. Feb. 5, 2004)
Case details for

Ford v. Boston

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH D. FORD, Appellant v. VICTOR BOSTON, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont

Date published: Feb 5, 2004

Citations

No. 09-03-508 CV (Tex. App. Feb. 5, 2004)