Jerald H. Miller, Jr. v. City of Fort Worth, Fort Worth Independent School District, Tarrant County College District, Tarrant County Hospital District, Tarrant County Regional Water District, and Tarrant County

Summarize Case

Related Cases

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-22-00476-CV ___________________________ JERALD H. MILLER, JR., Appellant V. CITY OF FORT WORTH, FORT WORTH INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, TARRANT COUNTY COLLEGE DISTRICT, TARRANT COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, TARRANT COUNTY REGIONAL WATER DISTRICT, AND TARRANT COUNTY, Appellees On Appeal from the 348th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 348-325467-21 Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Jerald H. Miller, Jr. filed a notice of appeal “seek[ing] to alter the trial court’s substantive and/or constructive denial” of his motion for continuance and for consolidation. Miller’s notice stated that the order was signed on September 2, 2022. The order attached to his notice was an order re-setting the case for trial. Although that order was signed on September 9, 2022, we assume that it is the order from which he attempts to appeal. Because the order did not appear to be a final judgment or appealable interlocutory order, we were concerned that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal. We contacted the trial court clerk, who informed us that the trial judge had not signed a final order or an order subject to appeal. We then notified Miller of our jurisdictional concern and warned him that we would dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing it. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. Miller filed a request for an extension of time to file a response. We granted that request, but Miller did not file a response. We have jurisdiction to consider appeals only from final judgments and from certain interlocutory orders made immediately appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); see, e.g., Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014. Because there does not appear to be a final judgment or appealable 2 interlocutory order in this case, we do not have jurisdiction over Miller’s appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. Per Curiam Delivered: February 23, 2023 3