Lorrie G. Hale v. Brian E. Hale--Appeal from 45th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-08-00272-CV Lorrie G. HALE, Appellant v. Brian E. HALE, Appellee From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2007-CI-14517 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 18, 2008 DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION This is an appeal from a judgment granting a petition for bill of review, vacating a prior judgment and ordering a new trial. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction. In November 2003, Lorrie Hale sued Brian Hale to enforce an out-of-state divorce decree. On December 22, 2003, the trial court signed a default judgment against Brian in the enforcement action. Brian subsequently filed a petition for bill of review in the trial court, seeking to vacate the 04-08-00272-CV default judgment. On January 24, 2008, the trial court granted the petition for bill of review. In its judgment, the trial court vacated the prior default judgment and ordered a new trial on the issue of child support. Lorrie later filed this appeal. After Lorrie perfected her appeal, Brian filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Relying on Jordan v. Jordan, 907 S.W.2d 471 (Tex. 1995), Brian contends that the January 24, 2008 judgment is interlocutory and not appealable. We agree. The January 24, 2008 judgment set aside the court s prior judgment but did not dispose of the merits of the case; therefore, the January 24, 2008 judgment is not a final, appealable judgment. See id. at 472 ( A bill of review which sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of the case on the merits is interlocutory and not appealable. ); see also In re B.F.A., No. 04-04-00835-CV, 2005 WL 154258, *1 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2005, no pet.) (mem. op.). Brian s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM -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.