noting that generally “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”
How later courts described this case
- noting that generally “an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-11-00434-CV
Damisela C. BROWN,
Appellant
v.
Shawn C. BROWN,
Appellee
From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2008-CI-08584
Honorable David A. Berchelmann, Jr., Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 28, 2011
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
In this appeal of a post-divorce division of property, we abated the appeal for the trial
court to clarify whether the May 25, 2011 summary judgment order was a final, appealable
order. On November 17, 2011, the trial court filed a letter with this court stating that the May
25, 2011 summary judgment order is not a final, appealable order. We reinstated the appeal and
ordered appellant to show cause in writing not later than December 13, 2011, why this appeal
should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Lehmann v. Har-
04-11-00434-CV
Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (noting that generally “an appeal may be taken only
from a final judgment”). We warned appellant that if she did not show cause within the time
provided, her appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
To date, appellant has not filed any response to the show cause order.
Therefore, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id.; Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d
at 195; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (authorizing dismissal for failure to comply with a court
order). Costs of this appeal are taxed against appellant.
PER CURIAM
-2-