Summary
finding no statutory provision authorizing an appeal from the interlocutory order
Summary of this case from In re Guardianship of PoagOpinion
No. 08-20-00076-CV
04-08-2020
IN RE GUARDIANSHIP OF JOSEPH POAG, An Incapacitated Person.
Appeal from the Probate Court No. 1 of El Paso County, Texas (TC# 2020-CGD00010 & 2020-GD00011) MEMORANDUM OPINION
This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether it should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Finding that there is no appealable order, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
It is well settled that appellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments, and such interlocutory orders as the Legislature deems appealable by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corporation, 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); see also TEX.CIV.PRAC.&REM.CODE ANN. § 51.014 (authorizing appeals from certain interlocutory orders). An order is not final for purposes of appeal unless it actually disposes of all parties and all claims. Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 205.
Appellant Marisela Chavez Poag's notice of appeal indicates she is attempting to appeal appointing a person other than her as her husband Joseph Poag's guardian. Because the appointment order does not dispose of all parties and all claims, this order is an interlocutory order that is not final for purposes of appeal. Further, there is no statutory provision authorizing an appeal from this interlocutory order. See generally TEX.CIV.PRAC.&REM.CODE ANN. § 51.014 (main interlocutory appeal statute). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. April 8, 2020
YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.