Maurice Mitchell v. Doug Dretke
Maurice Mitchell v. Doug Dretke
Opinion
IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-08-00139-CV
Maurice Mitchell,
Appellant
v.
Doug Dretke, et al.,
Appellees
From the 278th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 23,349
MEMORANDUM Opinion
Maurice Mitchell brings this appeal from an interlocutory order denying his motion for default judgment. However, there is no statute authorizing an interlocutory appeal from such an order. See Tex. A&M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840 (Tex. 2007) (“Appellate courts have jurisdiction to consider immediate appeals of interlocutory orders only if a statute explicitly provides such jurisdiction.”). Accordingly, the Clerk of this Court notified Mitchell that the appeal is subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction and may be dismissed if a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal was not filed within twenty-one days.
At the same time as notice was being sent to Mitchell, he filed a “Voluntary Dismissal of Appellant’s Interlocutory Notice of Appeal & The Appeal.” And after the notice was sent, Mitchell filed “Appellant’s Request to Expedite a Ruling” on the dismissal motion.
Mitchell’s pleadings do not state a basis for this Court to exercise jurisdiction other than to dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Vance, and
Justice Reyna
Appeal dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed May 28, 2008
[CV06]
pan>
Justice Gray
(Justice Gray dissenting)
Petition denied
Opinion delivered and filed November 1, 2001
Publish
[CV06]
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.