David Work v. Pamela Work

DISMISS; and Opinion Filed August 23, 2019.
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00818-CV
DAVID WORK, Appellant
V.
PAMELA WORK, Appellee
On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DF-19-04741
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Carlyle
Opinion by Justice Molberg
Appellant appeals from the trial court’s order granting a motion for partial summary
judgment. The Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal as there does not appear to be a
final judgment. At the Court’s request, the parties filed letter briefs addressing the jurisdictional
issue.
Generally, appellate courts have jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments. See
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A final judgment is one that
disposes of all parties and claims. See id.
In appellee’s original petition for post-divorce division of property, she sought division of
$67,295.64 and attorney’s fees. Appellant filed a counter-petition requesting his attorney’s fees
as sanctions. Appellee filed a motion for partial summary judgment requesting that the trial
court find that the $67,295.64 is an undivided community asset. The trial court granted the
motion. The order does not state how the $67,295.64 will be divided and does not dispose of the
parties’ claims for attorney’s fees. Nothing in appellant’s letter brief establishes this Court’s
jurisdiction.
Because the division of the monetary asset and claims for attorney’s fees remain pending,
the order is not final. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 42.3(a).
/Ken Molberg/
KEN MOLBERG
JUSTICE
190818F.P05
–2–
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
DAVID WORK, Appellant On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-19-00818-CV V. Trial Court Cause No. DF-19-04741.
Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg.
PAMELA WORK, Appellee Justices Myers and Carlyle participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellee PAMELA WORK recover her costs of this appeal from
appellant DAVID WORK.
Judgment entered this 23rd day of August, 2019.
–3–