Norris J. De Voll (Intervenor) v. Rebecca Demonbreun and William DowdsAppeal from 285th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00643-CV Norris J. DE VOLL (Intervenor), Appellant v. Rebecca and William Rebecca DEMONBREUN and William Dowds, Appellees From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-CI-05169 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: December 18, 2013 DISMISSED Appellant filed a notice of appeal on September 20, 2013 indicating his intent to appeal an order dismissing his plea in intervention in the underlying lawsuit which was signed on August 30, 2013. Having determined that the order appeared to be interlocutory, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant responded by filing a Brief on Appellate Jurisdiction and Alternative Motion to Dismiss W/O Prejudice asserting the order is final, or subject to a permissible interlocutory appeal, and moving in the alternative to dismiss the appeal without prejudice. The appellate record confirms that the 04-13-00643-CV August 30, 2013 order is interlocutory in that it does not dispose of all pending claims and parties in the underlying proceeding, and no severance order appears in the record. See Lehmann v. HarCon Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 200 (Tex. 2001) (judgment that does not dispose of all parties and causes of action is not final and appealable). Further, no statute provides for an interlocutory appeal of an order dismissing or striking a petition in intervention, or denying permission to intervene. Herrera v. Tex. Dept. of Family and Protective Services, No. 04-06-00890-CV, 2007 WL 2044580, at *1 (Tex. App. San Antonio July 18, 2007, no pet.) (mem. op.); see also Metromedia Long Distance, Inc. v. Hughes, 810 S.W.2d 494, 499 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1991, writ denied) (noting it is settled law that an order dismissing or striking a petition in intervention may not be appealed by the intervenor before the rendition of a final judgment). Therefore, we must dismiss the instant appeal. Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 200. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). 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.
