Opinion
NO. 09-17-00273-CV
08-17-2017
IN RE COMMITMENT OF ETHAN TODD STEWART
On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 10-05-05148-CV
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Ethan Todd Stewart filed a notice of appeal from an order denying a motion for a change of venue. We questioned our jurisdiction and the parties filed responses.
Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Stewart argues the order denying his motion for a change of venue disposed of all pending claims and parties. In a civil commitment case, however, the trial court retains jurisdiction while the commitment order remains in effect. See In re Commitment of Cortez, 405 S.W.3d 929, 932 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 2013, no pet.). Stewart has not identified a signed order by the trial court that is appealable at this time. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a); 43.2(f).
Stewart requests that we consider his response as a mandamus petition, but neither the form nor the substance of the response presents a valid basis for granting mandamus relief. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 52. Accordingly, the request is denied.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
/s/_________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice Submitted on August 16, 2017
Opinion Delivered August 17, 2017 Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.