Carol Johnene Morris v. Midland Central Appraisal DistrictAppeal from 142nd District Court of Midland County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed August 8, 2013 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-13-00205-CV __________ CAROL JOHNENE MORRIS, Appellant V. MIDLAND CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee On Appeal from the 142nd District Court Midland County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. TX13106 MEMORANDUM OPINION Carol Johnene Morris filed a pro se notice of appeal from an order of partial dismissal and an order appointing an attorney ad litem. The orders were entered by the trial court on June 23, 2013. We notified Morris by letter dated July 15, 2013, that it did not appear that these orders were final, appealable orders, and we requested that Morris file a response showing grounds to continue this appeal. Morris filed a response on August 1, 2013. However, she has not shown appropriate grounds to continue. Unless specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840 41 (Tex. 2007); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191 (Tex. 2001). In this case, the trial court merely ordered that this case is dismissed only as to the Property listed below. The dismissal was entered without prejudice to the plaintiff, Midland Central Appraisal District, again filing the cause of action against Morris at a later date. The order specifically states that the remaining causes of action as to all other property and defendants may be further prosecuted. In the other order from which Morris attempts to appeal, the trial court merely appointed an attorney ad litem to represent certain defendants who had been duly cited but had not answered or appeared. We note that the ad litem was not appointed to represent Appellant Morris. There is no indication that the trial court intended either order to be final and appealable, and they are not. Because no final, appealable order has been entered in this case, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM August 8, 2013 Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Willson, J. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
