Uber Technologies, Inc., and Rasier, LLC v. Brooks W. Boenig and Bridget B. Connolly-Boenig

FILE COPY

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
December 8, 2022

No. 04-22-00805-CV

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and Rasier, LLC,
Appellants

v.

Brooks W. BOENIG and Bridget B. Connolly-Boenig,
Appellees

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2022CI02105
Honorable Norma Gonzales, Judge Presiding

ORDER
On November 30, 2022, Appellants filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial court’s
“Order of November 10, 2022.”
The clerk’s record shows the trial court’s handwritten notes from that date, but a judge’s
notes “are not the kind of document[] that constitute a judgment, decision or order from which an
appeal may be taken.” See Goff v. Tuchscherer, 627 S.W.2d 397, 398–99 (Tex. 1982); Lares v.
Muniz, No. 04-20-00047-CV, 2020 WL 2441423, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 13, 2020,
no pet.) (mem. op.); see also In re A.W., 384 S.W.3d 872, 873 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012,
no pet.) (“[A] judge’s notes are for his or her own convenience and form no part of the record.”).
We ORDER Appellants to show cause in writing within TEN DAYS of the date of this
order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P.
42.3(a). If Appellants do not timely provide written proof as ordered, this appeal will be
dismissed without further notice. See id.
All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court.

_________________________________
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
 FILE COPY

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 8th day of December, 2022.

___________________________________
MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court