Ronald Edwin Duncan v. Brett Peabody

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________

NO. 09-05-227 CV

____________________



RONALD EDWIN DUNCAN, Appellant



V.



BRETT PEABODY, Appellee




On Appeal from the 221st District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 04-06-05037 CV




MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 23, 2005, we informed the parties that our jurisdiction was not apparent from the notice of appeal, and notified them that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. The appellant did not file a response.

The notice of appeal seeks to appeal "the denial of citation" in a petition for removal of an Assistant District Attorney. No appealable order has been signed by the trial court. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). (1) The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.

___________________________

HOLLIS HORTON

Justice



Opinion Delivered August 11, 2005

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.



































1. It appears the appellant may have filed a petition to remove an assistant district attorney as one might petition to remove an elected county officer. The order signed by the trial court does not dismiss the case. We note, however, that no appeal may be taken from a dismissal of a petition to remove the elected district attorney where the trial court refused to issue citation. See Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. § 87.016 (Vernon 1999).