BEVERLY SCOTT v. RAND PARTNERS REUNION TITLE NATHAN ALLEN JR TOM HENDERSON ESTATE JAMES WIMBERLY DONNA WIMBERLY LATTIMER JAMES TENOLA WHITE ROGER HENDERSON EARLINE HENDERSON GORDON HENDERSON JUREL HENDERSON SPENCER ARTHUR LEE HENDERSON CHERRYLYN HART WILSON DONALD RAY HART MARY HENDERSON CLARK LOIS HENDERSON JACKSON ROBERT SMITH JERRE GIBBS HENRY MILLER COMMERCIAL AND WALGREENS

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas.

BEVERLY SCOTT, Appellant v. RAND PARTNERS, L.P., REUNION TITLE, NATHAN ALLEN, JR., TOM HENDERSON ESTATE, JAMES WIMBERLY, DONNA WIMBERLY LATTIMER, JAMES TENOLA WHITE A/K/A ROGER HENDERSON, EARLINE HENDERSON, GORDON HENDERSON, JUREL HENDERSON SPENCER, ARTHUR LEE HENDERSON, CHERRYLYN HART WILSON, DONALD RAY HART, MARY HENDERSON CLARK, LOIS HENDERSON JACKSON, ROBERT SMITH, JERRE GIBBS, HENRY S. MILLER COMMERCIAL, AND WALGREENS, Appellees

No. 05-17-01312-CV

Decided: March 23, 2018

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Evans, and Justice Brown

MEMORANDUM OPINION

By letter dated February 20, 2018, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal as it appears the trial court's judgment is not final. We instructed appellant to file a letter brief addressing the jurisdictional issue.

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 sued nineteen defendants. By orders signed on February 20, 2015, the trial court dismissed appellant's claims against defendants Nathan Allen, Jr. and Reunion Title. On July 11, 2017, the trial court signed an order granting defendant Rand Partners, L.P.'s no-evidence motion for summary judgment and dismissing all of appellant's claims against it.

Appellant filed a letter brief but she failed to address the jurisdictional issue. Although appellant's claims against Nathan Allen, Jr., Reunion Title, and Rand Partners, L.P. have been disposed of, her claims against the remaining sixteen defendants remain pending. For this reason, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE

Copied to clipboard