Luther W. Cobb, Sr v. Joseph Campbell ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •        TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-20-00034-CV
    Luther W. Cobb, Sr., Appellant
    v.
    Joseph Campbell, Appellee
    FROM THE 264TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
    NO. 261,263-D, THE HONORABLE PAUL L. LEPAK, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Luther W. Cobb, Sr., acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal in January 2020, but
    he does not identify an appealable order or final judgment that he is appealing from in the notice.
    He references “the motion ‘request continuance.’”
    On February 4, 2020, the Clerk of this Court advised Cobb that it appears that this
    Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter because this Court’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals in
    which there exists a final or appealable judgment or order which has been signed by a judge. See
    Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 
    39 S.W.3d 191
    , 195 (Tex. 2001) (explaining that “general rule, with
    a few mostly statutory exceptions, is that an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment”);
    McKinnon v. Wallin, No. 03-18-00612-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 552, at *4 (Tex. App.—
    Austin Jan. 30, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal because appellant failed to identify
    final judgment or appealable order that would support court’s jurisdiction). The Clerk requested
    that Cobb file a response by February 14, 2020, explaining how this Court may exercise
    jurisdiction over this appeal and advised him that the failure to do so would result in the
    dismissal of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
    In response, Cobb filed a letter with this Court on February 12, 2020, in which he
    states that his notice of appeal is premature and references a “Reply and Motion for Rehearing
    for Appointment of Attorney Ad Litem.”          He also filed a motion to stay the trial court
    proceedings. In this motion, Cobb seems to be arguing that the final decree of divorce between
    Cobb and his ex-wife was void because “someone lined through 266,263-D and wrote
    261,263-D.” The clerk’s record contains the final decree of divorce showing the cause number
    of 266,263-D struck through and 261,263-D hand-written in its place as the cause number. The
    trial court signed this decree on February 18, 2014, and the decree reflects that Cobb appeared by
    telephone for the final hearing in November 2013.
    The underlying case in this appeal, however, concerns Joseph Campbell’s petition
    that was filed in July 2019 to modify the parent-child relationship between Cobb and his child.1
    Cobb has failed to identify a final judgment or appealable order in the underlying case that
    supports this Court’s jurisdiction. Because Cobb has not explained how this Court may exercise
    jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction and deny his motion
    to stay the trial court proceeding. 2
    1  According to the affidavit that Campbell filed in support of his petition, he is
    the child’s stepfather. He was married to Cobb’s ex-wife, who is deceased and was the
    child’s mother.
    2On this same date, this Court has dismissed Cobb’s related appeals in this Court’s
    cause numbers 03-20-00035-CV, 03-20-00036-CV, and 03-20-00037-CV.
    2
    __________________________________________
    Melissa Goodwin, Justice
    Before Justices Goodwin, Kelly, and Smith
    Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
    Filed: February 20, 2020
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-20-00034-CV

Filed Date: 2/20/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021