Opinion issued July 6, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-20-00221-CV
———————————
IN THE ESTATE OF EDNA MAE LEONARDS, DECEASED
On Appeal from the County Court
Chambers County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. P03846A
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellants W.J. “Billy” Devillier and Paula Winzer, independent co-
executors of the estate of Edna Mae Leonards, seek to appeal from a pretrial order
on will construction issues.
Background
The underlying litigation involves the construction of a will. On February
24, 2020, the trial court issued rulings in a “Pretrial Order on Will Construction
Issues; Exculpatory Clause” and a “Pretrial Order on Will Construction Issues:
Remainder Beneficiaries.” On February 26, 2020, the trial court issued a “Pretrial
Order Declaring the Devisees and Shares.” The trial court entered an “Order
Permitting an Accelerated Appeal” of the February orders on March 5, 2020.
Subsequently, on March 12, 2020, the Court issued an Amended Order on Will
Construction Issues superseding its prior pretrial orders and permitting accelerated
appeal of its amended order.
This Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments and those
interlocutory orders specifically authorized by statute. See Bison Bldg. Materials,
Ltd. v. Aldridge, 422 S.W.3d 582, 585 (Tex. 2012); CMH Homes v. Perez, 340
S.W.3d 444, 447–48 (Tex. 2011); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014
(authorizing appeals from certain interlocutory orders). The March 12, 2020
amended order is interlocutory and not subject to interlocutory appeal under the
Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
2
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 42.3(a). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot. 1
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Landau, Rivas-Molloy, and Farris.
1
This appeal apparently was intended to be filed as part of a petition for permissive
appeal filed in this Court as Cause No. 01-20-00224-CV on March 16, 2020. This
Court denied appellants’ petition for permissive appeal in that case on October 1,
2020. After being notified that the present appeal was subject to dismissal for
want of jurisdiction, appellants filed a “Joint Response to Court’s Inquiry About
Jurisdiction,” requesting that we revisit our prior decision dismissing their
permissive appeal in Cause No. 01-20-00224-CV, as part of this appeal. We
decline to do so.
3