In re: A Purported Lien or Claim Against Helvetia Asset Recovery, Inc. Appeal from 224th 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. 04-14-00258-CV IN RE: A PURPORTED LIEN OR CLAIM AGAINST HELVETIA ASSET RECOVERY, INC. From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-CI-18394 Honorable Karen H. Pozza, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: August 20, 2014 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Mr. Burton Kahn filed a pro se notice of appeal on behalf of Helvetia Asset Recovery, Inc. on April 16, 2014 indicating his intent to appeal an order setting aside judicial findings of fact and conclusions of law which was signed on December 11, 2013. Having determined that the order appeared to be neither a final judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order, we ordered Mr. Kahn to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Kahn filed a response in which he claims that the December 11, 2013 order was signed outside the trial court s period of plenary power, yet offers no explanation regarding the appealability of an order setting aside findings of fact and conclusions of law. Helvetia Asset Recovery, Inc. filed a letter in which it agreed that the December 11, 2013 order is not a final, appealable order and 04-14-00258-CV that this court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. In the letter, Helvetia also asserts that Mr. Kahn lacks authority to file an appeal on its behalf. The appellate record confirms that the December 11, 2013 order is not a final judgment 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 setting aside judicial findings of fact and conclusions of law. Therefore, we must dismiss the instant appeal. Id. 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.
