Dismissed and Opinion Filed October 20, 2016
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-00938-CV
SENRICK WILKERSON, Appellant
V.
CITY OF DALLAS, LORI ORDIWAY, CALVIN JOHNSON, BROOK GRONA-ROBB,
DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY SUSAN HAWK, DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,
DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF LUPE VALDEZ, Appellees
On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-00716-D
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart
Opinion by Chief Justice Wright
By letter dated September 9, 2016, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal.
Specifically, there does not appear to be a final judgment. We instructed appellant to file a letter
brief addressing our concern with an opportunity for appellees to file a response. Appellant filed
a letter brief but appellees did not.
Generally, this Court has jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments and certain
interlocutory orders as permitted by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191,
195 (Tex. 2001). A final judgment is one that disposes of all pending parties and claims. See id.
Appellant appeals from the trial court’s July 24, 2016 order denying two of his pretrial
motions and overruling his objections to a joint motion to declare him a vexatious litigant. On
the record before this Court, it appears the motion to declare appellant a vexatious litigant
remains pending in the trial court.
Appellant contends there is a final judgment and relies on the following statement in the
July 24th order: “[t]he motions are DENIED and the objections are OVERRULED.” This
statement does not show that a final judgment was rendered. Rather, it shows that the trial court
considered and ruled on appellant’s two motions and objections, nothing more.
Because the record before this Court does not contain a final judgment or other
appealable interlocutory order, this Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
/Carolyn Wright/
CAROLYN WRIGHT
CHIEF JUSTICE
160938F.P05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
SENRICK WILKERSON, Appellant On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00938-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-00716-D.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright.
CITY OF DALLAS, LORI ORDIWAY, Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart
CALVIN JOHNSON, BROOK GRONA- participating.
ROBB, DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, DALLAS
COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SUSAN
HAWK, DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, AND DALLAS COUNTY
SHERIFF LUPE VALDEZ, Appellees
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellees CITY OF DALLAS, LORI ORDIWAY, CALVIN
JOHNSON, BROOK GRONA-ROBB, DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S
OFFICE, DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SUSAN HAWK, DALLAS COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, AND DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFF LUPE VALDEZ recover
their costs of this appeal from appellant SENRICK WILKERSON.
Judgment entered October 20, 2016.
–3–