Douglas v. Booker (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 18, 2008)(Jennings)
interlocutory order denying summary judgment not immediately appealable)
Justice Jennings  
Before Justices Jennings, Hanks and Bland
01-06-01069-CV  Ralph O. Douglas v. Joyce Booker
Appeal from 129th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court
Judge: Hon. Grant Dorfman


Appellant, Ralph O. Douglas, challenges the trial court’s order denying his no-evidence motion for summary
We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The order from which Douglas appeals states as follows:


On the 23rd day of October, 2006, came to be heard plaintiff’s no-evidence motion for summary judgment.
After considering the pleadings, the court will deny plaintiff’s motion.

On November 20, 2006, Douglas served notice of his intent to appeal this trial court order.
The general rule, with a few mostly statutory exceptions, is that an appeal may be taken only from a final
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). When there has not been a
conventional trial on the merits, an order or judgment is not final for purposes of appeal unless it actually
disposes of every pending claim and party or unless it clearly and unequivocally states that it finally disposes
of all claims and parties. Id. at 205. Here, the trial court order denied Douglas’s no-evidence motion for
summary judgment, but it did not dispose of his claims, nor did it unequivocally state that it finally disposed of
all claims and parties.
The Clerk of this Court brought the interlocutory nature of the order from which Douglas is appealing to his
attention and requested that Douglas file a response explaining the jurisdictional basis of the appeal. Douglas
has responded, but has not provided the requested explanation.

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). Any pending motions are likewise
dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Terry Jennings


Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Hanks, and Bland.