Christopher M. Perricone v. Katie Beth Perricone, et al.

Summary

The Eleventh Court of Appeals of Texas dismissed Christopher M. Perricone’s appeal for want of jurisdiction and without prejudice. The court held that the trial court had not entered a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order because the orders did not dispose of all parties or claims, sever a party, or contain unequivocal finality language. The dismissal did not reach the merits of Perricone’s appellate complaints and did not affect the disposition of a related Rule 145 issue.

Holdings

1. An order or judgment is appealable when it disposes of all parties and claims or includes unequivocal finality language expressly disposing of all claims and parties; because the trial-court orders did neither, the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction.
2. When no appealable order or final judgment exists, the court must dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, without prejudice to the appellant's right to file a notice of appeal after an appealable order or final judgment is entered.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court had entered a final judgment or an interlocutory order made appealable by statute.
2. Whether the court of appeals could retain or abate the appeal while finality remained disputed in the trial court.
3. Whether the appeal should be dismissed without prejudice for want of jurisdiction.

Disposition

dismissed