glenn-winningham-house-of-fearn-v-terry-means-so-called-judge-john-h ( 2012 )

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-12-00420-CV
Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn § From the 236th District Court
v.
§ of Tarrant County (236-261874-12)
Terry Means, (so-called) Judge,
John H. McBryde, (so-called) Judge,
Sidney A. Fitzwater, (so-called)
Judge, Karen Mitchell, Clerk of the § December 21, 2012
Court, Lynn Tedford, Deputy Clerk,
Edmond Dieth, Assistant Manager,
United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, David § Per Curiam
Knox, Attorney, Federal Express
Corporation, Gregg Abbott, Texas
Attorney General, and Rick Perry,
Texas Governor
JUDGMENT
This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that
the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for
want of jurisdiction.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
PER CURIAM
2
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-12-00420-CV
GLENN WINNINGHAM; HOUSE OF APPELLANT
FEARN
V.
TERRY MEANS, (SO-CALLED) APPELLEES
JUDGE, JOHN H. MCBRYDE, (SO-
CALLED) JUDGE, SIDNEY A.
FITZWATER, (SO-CALLED)
JUDGE, KAREN MITCHELL,
CLERK OF THE COURT, LYNN
TEDFORD, DEPUTY CLERK,
EDMOND DIETH, ASSISTANT
MANAGER, UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS,
DAVID KNOX, ATTORNEY,
FEDERAL EXPRESS
CORPORATION, GREGG ABBOTT,
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL,
AND RICK PERRY, TEXAS
GOVERNOR
----------
FROM THE 236TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
3
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellant Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn filed a notice of appeal on
October 15, 2012, complaining of the trial court’s order sustaining the contest to
his petition to proceed in the trial court without the prepayment of fees or costs.
We notified Appellant on November 8, 2012, of our concern that we lack
jurisdiction over this appeal because the order sustaining the contest to his
petition to proceed in the trial court without the prepayment of fees or costs does
not appear to be an appealable order, and we stated that his appeal could be
dismissed unless he or any party filed within ten days a response showing
grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant’s response does not show grounds
for continuing the appeal.
The general rule, with a few exceptions, is that an appeal may be taken
only from a final judgment.2 Interlocutory orders may be appealed only if allowed
by statute.3 The trial court’s order sustaining the contest to Appellant’s petition to
proceed in the trial court without advance payment of fees and costs is an
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).
3
Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001).
4
interlocutory order for which there is no right of interlocutory appeal.4 We thus
lack subject matter jurisdiction over this appeal.5 Accordingly, we dismiss this
appeal for want of jurisdiction.6
PER CURIAM
DELIVERED: December 21, 2012
4
See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a) (West Supp. 2012);
Montgomery v. Matucci, 02-10-00127-CV, 2010 WL 3075597, at *1 (Tex. App.—
Fort Worth Aug. 5, 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.).
5
See Montgomery, 2010 WL 3075597, at *1; Aguilar v. Tex. La Fiesta Auto
Sales LLC, No. 01-08-00653-CV, 2009 WL 1562838, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] June 4, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.).
6
See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).
5