Cynthia S. Fornesa and Ricardo Fornesa, Jr. v. EFG Companies John Pappanastos Scott Knapp ( 2024 )


Menu:
  • Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 08, 2024.
    In The
    Fourteenth Court of Appeals
    NO. 14-23-00579-CV
    CYNTHIA S. FORNESA AND RICARDO FORNESA JR., Appellants
    V.
    ENTERPRISE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.; JOHN PAPPANASTOS; AND
    SCOTT KNAPP, Appellees
    On Appeal from the 434th Judicial District Court
    Fort Bend County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 23-DCV-302941
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    This is an attempted appeal from a July 21, 2023 interlocutory order.
    Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con
    Corp., 
    39 S.W.3d 191
    , 195 (Tex. 2001). When orders do not dispose of all pending
    parties and claims, the orders remain interlocutory and unappealable until final
    judgment is rendered unless a statutory exception applies. Bally Total Fitness
    Corp. v. Jackson, 
    53 S.W.3d 352
    , 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v.
    Tipps, 
    842 S.W.2d 266
    , 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Appellant is
    attempting to appeal a July 21, 2023, order granting a motion to compel arbitration
    and plea in abatement. On August 14, 2023, appellant filed a notice of appeal.
    We lack subject-matter jurisdiction over the July 21, 2023 order because
    orders compelling arbitration are not reviewable by interlocutory appeal. See
    Chambers v. O’Quinn, 
    242 S.W.3d 30
    , 31–32 (Tex. 2007) (holding that neither
    Texas Arbitration Act nor Federal Arbitration Act provide for interlocutory appeals
    of orders granting or compelling arbitration. “The Act is one-sided, allowing
    interlocutory appeals solely from orders that deny arbitration.”). Thus, the August
    14, 2023, notice of appeal was not sufficient to invoke our jurisdiction.
    On December 18, 2023, notification was transmitted to all parties the appeal
    was subject to dismissal without further notice for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R.
    App. P. 42.3(a). Appellant’s response does not demonstrate this court’s
    jurisdiction.
    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Spain, and Hassan.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-23-00579-CV

Filed Date: 2/8/2024

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/11/2024