Date: 11-17-2022

Case Style:

Frederick Louis Pugh v. Barbara Winfield-Pugh

Case Number: 01-22-00007-CV

Judge: Chief Justice Radack Justice Landau Justice Hightower

Court:

Fifth Court of Appeals Dallas, Texas

On appeal from the County Court at Law No 1 of Galveston County

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Dallas, TX - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory

Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.

Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement

Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.

MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge

Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800

Defendant's Attorney: Barbara Winfield

Description:

Dallas, Texas – Divorce lawyer represented Appellant with appealing the final decree of divorce .

Appellant Frederick Louis Pugh (Frederick) appeals the final decree of
divorce entered by the trial court on December 20, 2021. But the appellate record
shows that the trial court set aside the appealed-from divorce decree within the
plenary period, when it issued an order rescinding the decree on January 10, 2022.
2
See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(d) (“The trial court, regardless of whether an appeal has
been perfected, has plenary power to grant a new trial or to vacate, modify, correct,
or reform the judgment within thirty days after the judgment is signed.”).
Consequently, there is not a final judgment in this case, and the original petition for
divorce filed by Frederick’s spouse, appellee Barbara Winfield-Pugh (Barbara), is
unresolved and remains pending in the trial court.
Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v.
Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). We have no jurisdiction to hear
an appeal from an order or judgment that is not final, unless a statute permits the
appeal. See Stary v. DeBord, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352–53 (Tex. 1998); see also TEX.
CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE §§ 51.012, .014. And if this is an appeal over which we
have no jurisdiction, it must be dismissed. See Royal Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Ragsdale,
273 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.) (jurisdiction
is fundamental and cannot be ignored).
Here, the trial court has not entered a final judgment, and no statute authorizes
an interlocutory appeal. On September 20, 2022, this Court notified the parties of its
intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless Frederick filed a response
demonstrating our jurisdiction over his appeal by September 30, 2022. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). Frederick has not filed a response.

Outcome: Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: