Opinion
04-23-01077-CV
01-05-2024
Hannah ROBERTS, Appellant v. Jason BURNETT, Appellee
From the 456th District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 23-0619-CV-E Honorable Heather H. Wright, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
On November 27, 2023 appellant Hannah Roberts filed a pro se notice of appeal. The notice of appeal does not identify any judgment being appealed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(D)(2). INSTEAD, IT ATTACHES AN AFFIDAVIT IN WHICH APPELLANT ACCUSES HER FORMER COUNSEL IN THE CASE, ALONG WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL, OF FRAUD AND DECEPTION. THE CLERK'S RECORD WAS FILED ON JANUARY 2, 2024. A REVIEW OF THE RECORD INCLUDES A MAY 9, 2023 AGREED FINAL JUDGMENT. BASED ON THE MAY 9, 2023 JUDGMENT, A NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS DUE JUNE 8, 2023, OR JUNE 23, 2023 WITH AN EXTENSION OF TIME. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3.
The record also includes a November 9, 2023 order compelling adequate responses to post-judgment discovery requests. Generally, a direct appeal may challenge only "a final judgment or certain interlocutory orders expressly made appealable by statute." Sunnyland Dev., Inc. v. Shawn Ibrahim, Inc., 597 S.W.3d 1, 2 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2020, no pet.) (citing TEX. CIV. PRAC. &REM. CODE §§ 51.012, 51.014(a)); see also Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). "Orders made for the purpose of enforcing or carrying into effect an already-rendered judgment generally are not final judgments or decrees, and therefore cannot be appealed." Sintim v. Larson, 489 S.W.3d 551, 556 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.); In re Doe, 397 S.W.3d 847, 849 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2013, no pet.); Qualia v. Qualia, 37 S.W.3d 128, 129 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2011, no pet.). "An appeal from a post-judgment order that is not appealable must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction." Sunnyland, 597 S.W.3d at 3; see also Lovall v. Yen, No. 14-07-00770-CV, 2008 WL 361373, at *1-2 (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 12, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal of post-judgment order that "was merely a ministerial act incident to the final judgment, providing for disbursement of funds directed by the [final] judgment, akin to a writ of execution").
The November 9, 2023 order does not appear to be either a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order. See, e.g., Qualia, 37 S.W.3d at 129; Lovall, 2008 WL 361373, at *1-2. We therefore order appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction by February 5, 2024.
If appellant does not timely file an adequate response to this order, we will dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(C). IF A SUPPLEMENTAL CLERK'S RECORD IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH THIS COURT'S JURISDICTION, APPELLANT MUST ASK THE TRIAL COURT CLERK TO PREPARE ONE AND MUST NOTIFY THE CLERK OF THIS COURT THAT SUCH A REQUEST WAS MADE. ALL OTHER APPELLATE DEADLINES ARE SUSPENDED PENDING FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of January, 2024.