Lowell Quincy Green v. Lorie Davis and David Guiterrez
10-17-00010-CV
| Tex. App. | Mar 8, 2017Background
- Appellant Lowell Quincy Green filed an original 42 U.S.C. § 1983 petition in the Tenth Court of Appeals against Lorie Davis and David Gutierrez.
- The court notified Green that it appeared to lack jurisdiction because no final judgment or appealable interlocutory order was before it and requested a response.
- Green did not respond to the court’s jurisdictional inquiry.
- Green also filed a motion for summary judgment in the appellate court.
- The court concluded Green was attempting to initiate a new suit in the appellate court rather than appeal a final order from a trial court.
- Because the appellate court had no jurisdiction over an original § 1983 action, the appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction; unpaid filing fees were ordered written off administratively (without waiving the underlying obligation).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appellate court has jurisdiction over this filing | Green filed an original § 1983 petition in the appellate court seeking relief | Court (and appellees) implicitly: appellate court lacks jurisdiction absent an appeal from a final judgment or statutory interlocutory order | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction — appellate court cannot hear original § 1983 suit |
| Whether there is a final, appealable order | Green did not identify a final judgment or interlocutory order to appeal | Appellate rules require a final judgment or authorized interlocutory appeal | Court held there was no final, appealable order and thus no jurisdiction |
| Proper procedural vehicle for relief (appeal vs. original filing) | Green proceeded by filing original petition and summary judgment in appellate court | Appellate jurisdiction extends only to appeals from lower courts; new actions belong in trial court | Filing was improper in appellate court; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction |
| Filing-fee handling when jurisdiction lacking | Green did not respond and unpaid fees remained | Court rules generally require fee collection at filing; court may administratively write off fees | Court suspended collection rule for this case and ordered clerk to write off unpaid filing fees (fees remain owed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Gregory v. Foster, 35 S.W.3d 255 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000) (only final trial-court decisions are appealable)
- N.E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893 (Tex. 1966) (appeals are from final judgments)
- Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191 (Tex. 2001) (appealability limited to final judgments and statutorily authorized interlocutory orders)
- Aguilar v. Weber, 72 S.W.3d 729 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002) (appellate court jurisdiction limited to what the trial court could have presented on appeal)
- Nabejas v. Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 972 S.W.2d 875 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1998) (appellate courts lack original-jurisdiction authority over trial-court matters)