Opinion
02-24-00150-CV
05-23-2024
Ex parte J.M.
On Appeal from the 213th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. D213-E-19509
Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Elizabeth Kerr Justice
On March 6, 2024, the trial court signed a discovery order in Appellant J.M.'s pending expunction proceeding. J.M. attempts to appeal from that order.
On April 9, 2024, we wrote to J.M. expressing our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because the discovery order did not appear to be a final judgment or appealable interlocutory order. We warned J.M. that we could dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction unless he or any other party filed a response by April 19, 2024, showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. We have received no response.
Our appellate jurisdiction is limited to appeals from final judgments and from interlocutory orders made appealable by statute. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001) (stating that "the general rule, with a few mostly statutory exceptions, is that an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment"); see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a) (listing appealable interlocutory orders). "Discovery orders are interlocutory in nature and therefore not appealable until after a final judgment is entered." Edwards v. Panda Express Inc., No. 05-19-00715-CV, 2019 WL 4027082, at *1 (Tex. App.-Dallas Aug. 27, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.); see Shanks v. Wair, No. 02-20-00138-CV, 2020 WL 5415225, at *1 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth Sept. 10, 2020, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (explaining that "discovery orders are generally not immediately appealable" and dismissing appeal from discovery order for want of jurisdiction because the legislature "has not specified that interlocutory discovery orders are immediately appealable"). Because we have neither a final judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order here, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).