IN THE INTEREST OF AND MINOR CHILDREN v. << (2011)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

By notice of appeal filed June 10, 2010, Father challenges a May 27, 2010 trial court order.

Because Father has failed to bring forward a final appealable judgment or order, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.   See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(a).

Our jurisdiction is fundamental and never presumed.  Brashear v. Victoria Gardens of McKinney, L.L.C., 302 S.W.3d 542, 546 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2009, no pet.);  K & S Interests, Inc. v. Tex. Am. Bank/Dallas, 749 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1988, writ denied).   Generally, we have jurisdiction only over appeals from recognized interlocutory orders or final judgments, that is, judgments that dispose of all pending parties and claims in the record.   See Lehmann v. Har–Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex.2001).   Docket sheet entries reflecting the trial court's rulings do not invoke our jurisdiction.   See Bryan v. Watumull, 230 S.W.3d 503, 507 n.2 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2007, no pet.) (docket sheet entry generally forms no part of record which may be considered and cannot be used to show the existence of order or judgment).

The record here contains a May 27, 2010 docket sheet entry showing the trial court granted the parties a divorce on that day.   The docket sheet entry also recites the court's rulings.   However, the complained-of order or final decree of divorce is not in the record.

By letter dated December 29, 2010, we directed the district court clerk to file a supplemental record containing a copy of the divorce decree.   When the clerk responded by filing a supplemental record containing another copy of the docket sheet, we directed the parties, by letter dated February 18, 2011, to obtain the requested record.   We cautioned that if the requested record was not filed within ten days of the date of the letter, we would dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.   To date, the requested record has not been filed.

On February 23, 2011, Father tendered his brief.   In the brief, Father complains of two of the trial court's May 27, 2010 rulings.   Although the briefing rules require an appellant to include an appendix containing the complained-of judgment or order, see Tex.R.App. P. 38.1(k), Father failed to do so.

A final judgment or appealable interlocutory order is fundamental to our jurisdiction.   Without either, our jurisdiction is not invoked.   See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 195.   Because we have here only a docket sheet entry, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal and dismiss it.   See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(a).

100723F.P05

PER CURIAM