From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grantham v. Comm'n for Lawyer Discipline

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Mar 2, 2021
No. 05-20-00980-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 2, 2021)

Opinion

No. 05-20-00980-CV

03-02-2021

DAVID SHANE GRANTHAM, Appellant v. COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE, Appellee


On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-10187

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Pedersen, III, and Goldstein
Opinion by Justice Pedersen, III

Appellant appeals from the trial court's order granting substitute service of process. Before the Court is appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellee contends this Court lacks jurisdiction over the order because it is neither a final judgment nor appealable interlocutory order. We agree.

Generally, this Court has jurisdiction over final judgments and certain interlocutory orders as permitted by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a). A final judgment is one that disposes of all parties and claims. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195. An order granting substitute service of process is neither a final judgment nor an interlocutory order for which an appeal is authorized by statute. See Estate of Harris, No. 02-16-00398-CV, 2016 WL 7157350, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 8, 2016, no pet.) (order on motion for substitute service neither final nor appealable interlocutory order).

Appellant did not file a response to the motion to dismiss. Because the order granting substitute service of process is neither a final judgment nor subject to an interlocutory appeal, we grant appellee's motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

/Bill Pedersen, III//

BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE 200980f.p05

JUDGMENT

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-10187.
Opinion delivered by Justice Pedersen, III. Justices Partida-Kipness and Goldstein participating.

In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE recover its costs of this appeal from appellant DAVID SHANE GRANTHAM. Judgment entered this 2nd day of March, 2021.


Summaries of

Grantham v. Comm'n for Lawyer Discipline

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Mar 2, 2021
No. 05-20-00980-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 2, 2021)
Case details for

Grantham v. Comm'n for Lawyer Discipline

Case Details

Full title:DAVID SHANE GRANTHAM, Appellant v. COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE…

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Mar 2, 2021

Citations

No. 05-20-00980-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 2, 2021)