COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO.  2-09-220-CV

ARTURO HERNANDEZ APPELLANT

V.

EDDIE C. WILLIAMS, DOCTOR DAVID APPELLEES

POTTER, AND JOHN WILSON, P.A.

------------

FROM THE 89TH DISTRICT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION ^{(footnote: 1)}

------------

Arturo Hernandez filed a notice of appeal from a June 17, 2009 order denying his Motion For Appointment of Counsel.  It appears that the trial court has not signed a final judgment or appealable interlocutory order.  On July 23, 2009, we notified Appellant that unless he or any other party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response by August 3, 2009, showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we would dismiss the appeal. Hernandez filed a response, but the response does not raise any grounds for continuing the appeal.

A party may appeal only from a final judgment or an interlocutory order specifically made appealable by statute or rule.   Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 & n.12 (Tex. 2001); see , e.g. ,Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014 (Vernon Supp. 2008) (listing appealable interlocutory orders). Because the trial court has not signed a final judgment or appealable interlocutory order, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: August 20, 2009

FOOTNOTES

1:

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.