Opinion
NO. 02-14-00025-CVNO. 02-14-00026-CV
03-13-2014
KEITHA THAYER APPELLANT v. MARK THAYER APPELLEE
FROM THE 90TH DISTRICT COURT OF YOUNG COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Keitha Thayer attempts to appeal from two orders denying her motion to recuse the trial judge. Acting Presiding Judge of the Eighth Administrative Judicial Region of Texas, Judge Jeff Walker, heard Appellant's motion to recuse and denied it on December 11, 2013. Appellant filed a notice of appeal seeking to appeal the December 11 order, and the appeal was assigned cause number 02-14-00025-CV. On December 20, 2013, Judge Walker heard Appellant's motion to recuse for a second time and denied it. Appellant filed a notice of appeal seeking to appeal the December 20 order, and the appeal was assigned cause number 02-14-00026-CV.
On January 24, 2014, we notified the parties of our concern that this court lacks jurisdiction because neither the December 11 order nor the December 20 order appears to be a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order. We also notified the parties that we were further concerned we lack jurisdiction over the appeal assigned cause number 02-14-00025-CV because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1 (providing that notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed). We further notified the parties that both appeals would be subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeals filed with the court, on or before February 3, 2014, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals. Appellant responded, stating that she agreed both appeals should be dismissed.
Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment or order. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). An order denying a motion to recuse is not an appealable interlocutory order. Hawkins v. Walker, 233 S.W.3d 380, 401 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007, no pet.). Specifically, rule 18a(j)(1)(A) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that an order denying a motion to recuse may be reviewed only "on appeal from the final judgment." Tex. R. Civ. P. 18a(j)(1)(A); see Hawkins, 233 S.W.3d at 401. Because the orders from which Appellant attempts to appeal are not appealable interlocutory orders, we dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).
PER CURIAM PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.