Opinion
No. 04-04-00654-CV
Delivered and Filed: February 23, 2005.
Appeal from the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas, Trial Court No. Dc-03-350, Honorable Alex W. Gabert, Judge Presiding.
Dismissed.
Sitting: Alma L. LÓPEZ, Chief Justice, Catherine STONE, Justice, Phylis J. SPEEDLIN, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
From our initial review of the record it appeared that the summary judgment sought to be appealed is interlocutory because it does not dispose of the appellant's claims against the other defendants, J.C. Ramirez, Pablo A. Ramirez, Jr., Oscar Ruben Santos and Benjamin Santos, and no severance order appears in the record. Therefore, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant responded that his claims against the other parties remain pending in this suit. Appellant agreed that the summary judgment order may be interlocutory, but argued that it may also be interpreted as final because it awards costs to the prevailing defendant, Noel P. Benavides, and he has sought execution. Based on our consideration of appellant's response and review of the record, we conclude that the summary judgment order is not final and appealable because it does not dispose of all parties and causes of action in this suit. See City of Beaumont v. Guillory, 751 S.W. 2d 491, 492 (Tex. 1988); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 42.3(a). Costs of appeal are taxed against appellant.
Explain jurisdictional problem.
Describe inadequate response and explain why we lack jurisdiction (use discussion from show cause order).