Howard Grant v. Ariann M. Grant Appeal from 387th District Court of Fort Bend County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-16-00178-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ HOWARD GRANT, Appellant, v. ARIANN M. GRANT, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 387th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Howard Grant, attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered on January 6, 2016, denying a bill of review in cause no. 15-DCV-226932.1 Upon review of 1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the First Court of Appeals in Houston pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West, Westlaw through 2015 R.S.). the documents before the Court, it appeared that there was no final, appealable order or judgment. On April 6, 2016, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court’s notice. The Fort Bend County District Clerk’s Office has informed this Court that there is no signed order denying a bill of review. In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). A bill of review which sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of all the issues of the case on the merits is interlocutory in nature and is not an appealable final judgment. Jordan v. Jordan, 907 S.W.2d 471, 472 (Tex. 1995) (citing Warren v. Walter, 414 S.W.2d 423 (Tex. 1967)). Appellant has not demonstrated that a written order has been signed. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 12th day of May, 2016. 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.
