NO IMMEDIATE APPEAL OF ORDER DENYING INDIGENCY STATUS IN TRIAL COURT
Sloan v. Sloan (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 9, 2008)(per curiam)
(no appellate jurisdiction to review interlocutory order denying indigency status)
There is no statute providing for an interlocutory appeal of the court's ruling on
indigency for trial proceedings. Lomax v. Thomas, No. 14-08-00163-CV, 2008 WL
4308610, 1 (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 28, 2008, no pet. h.). Thus, an order
denying indigent status may not be appealed before entry of final judgment. In contrast,
a trial court's indigency ruling pertaining to an already pending appeal is appealable.
DISMISSED: Per Curiam
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Guzman and Brown
14-08-00181-CV Andre Sloan v. Doreen (Baker) Sloan
Appeal from 312th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: David D. Farr
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant filed a notice of appeal from an order signed April 3, 2008, sustaining a contest to his
pauper's oath. Pursuant to an order from this Court, a partial clerk's record relevant to appellant's
claim of indigence was filed on July 27, 2008. According to the record, no final judgment has been
entered in this case, and appellant is attempting to appeal the denial of pauper status for the trial of
the underlying divorce.
Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d
191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory orders may be appealed only if permitted by statute. Bally Total
Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842
S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
There is no statute providing for an interlocutory appeal of the court's ruling on indigency for trial
proceedings. Lomax v. Thomas, No. 14-08-00163-CV, 2008 WL 4308610, 1 (Tex. App.- Houston
[14th Dist.] Aug. 28,2008, no pet. h.). Thus, an order denying indigent status may not be appealed
before entry of final judgment. In contrast, a trial court's indigency ruling pertaining to an already
pending appeal is appealable. See In re Arroyo, 988 S.W.2d 737, 738-39 (Tex. 1998) (orig.
proceeding).
On August 29, 2008, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court's intention to dismiss the
appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing
the appeal on or before September 15, 2008. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). No response has been
filed.
We are without jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed October 9, 2008.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Guzman and Brown.