Richard Owen Taylor v. Valerie Annette Taylor and In the Interest of Z.A.T., K.M.T., and K.O.T., Children--Appeal from 170th District Court of McLennan County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-02-093-CV

RICHARD OWEN TAYLOR,

Appellant

v.

VALERIE ANNETTE TAYLOR,

Appellee

AND IN THE INTEREST OF

Z.A.T., K.M.T., AND K.O.T., CHILDREN

From the 170th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court # 99-2937-4

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This Court recently reversed a divorce decree rendered by the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial because the court refused to allow Appellant Richard Owen Taylor to participate at trial and improperly denied his request for a jury trial. See Taylor v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 93, 102 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.). On remand, the trial court has apparently denied Richard s request for a bench warrant, permitting him instead to proceed by affidavit, deposition, telephone, or other effective means. Id. at 98 (quoting In re Taylor, 28 S.W.3d 240, 249 (Tex. App. Waco 2000, orig. proceeding)).

Richard filed a Notice of Accelerated Appeal from the trial court s order denying [his] renewed motion for bench warrant. Because this is an interlocutory order, we notified Richard by letter dated April 16, 2002 that his appeal was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless he showed grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Richard responded as follows:

This Court has discretion to review any interlocutory order whatever in a civil case if the trial Judge s order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of litigation.

Although Richard cites Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 ( Accelerated Appeals in Civil Cases ), the quoted statement is essentially the language of section 51.014(d) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which was enacted last year by the Legislature. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 51.014(d) (Vernon Supp. 2002); cf. Tex. R. App. P. 28.

Section 51.014(d) authorizes an interlocutory appeal of any written order . . . in a civil action not otherwise appealable upon order of a district court if:

(1) the parties agree that the order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion;

(2) an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation; and

(3) the parties agree to the order.

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 51.014(d).

The clerk s record contains no agreed order from the trial court authorizing this appeal. See id. The order denying Richard s request for a bench warrant is not otherwise appealable. See Lucas v. Burleson Pub. Co., 39 S.W.3d 693, 696 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Gray

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Opinion issued and filed May 1, 2002

Do not publish

[CV06]