Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 14, 2009.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-09-00307-CV
____________
HELENE E. HOLT AND BYRON K. ROBINSON, Appellants
V.
WILLIE AND IDA McQUEEN, Appellees
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 919040
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On March 24, 2009, appellants filed an Aamended@ notice of appeal, stating that they wished to appeal from a final judgment of eviction signed March 10, 2009. According to appellees, this appeal is actually from an order modifying conditions of a supersedeas bond signed March 10, 2009, and the original conditions of the bond were set forth in a final judgment signed February 13, 2009. Appellants filed a notice of appeal from the February 13, 2009 judgment on February 24, 2009, and that appeal was assigned to this Court and docketed under our appeal number 14-09-00193-CV.
On April 24, 2009, appellees filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. Appellees assert that the March 13, 2009, order is not a separately appealable order. They argue that if appellants seek to have this Court review the conditions of the supersedeas bond, they are required to follow the procedures set forth in Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24. See Tex. R. App. P 24.4(a)(requiring a party seeking review of a trial court=s ruling on an order suspending enforcement of a judgment to file a motion in the court of appeals having jurisdiction over the appeal from the judgment).
It is unclear from appellants= notice of appeal whether they are attempting to challenge the modification of the supersedeas conditions signed March 10, 2009, or whether they simply seek to appeal the final judgment of eviction. Appellants have not responded to the motion to dismiss.
We agree that any challenge to the supersedeas order should be considered as part of the appeal from the final judgment pending under number 14-09-00193-CV. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.4. Upon filing a proper motion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.4, this Court will undertake a review of the trial court=s order modifying the bond conditions.
Appellees= motion to dismiss is granted. Accordingly, this appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of. Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Frost.