Background
William Dan Moss attempted to appeal an order allegedly denying his petition for a bill of review in the Estate of Mamie Jo Jenkins. Moss represented that the trial court signed the order on July 23, 2026, but the clerk’s record contained no signed, written order.
On October 2, 2026, the court of appeals notified Moss that the order he sought to challenge was missing from the record and gave him until October 12 to establish grounds for retaining the appeal. Moss did not respond. He later filed a motion for an extension of time on October 20.
The Court’s Holding
The Texas Sixth Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. It explained that, absent statutory authority for an interlocutory appeal, its jurisdiction extends only to appeals from final judgments and that an appealable judgment or order must be written and signed by the trial court.
Because the record contained no signed, written order denying Moss’s bill-of-review petition, the court lacked an appealable order over which it could exercise jurisdiction. The court denied Moss’s motion for an extension of time as moot.
Key Takeaways
- An appeal ordinarily requires a final judgment unless a statute specifically authorizes an interlocutory appeal.
- A trial court’s ruling must be written and signed to constitute an appealable judgment or order.
- When the appellate record contains no signed order and the appellant does not establish jurisdiction after receiving notice, dismissal for want of jurisdiction is proper.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that appellate jurisdiction cannot rest on an appellant’s assertion that the trial court entered an order. Practitioners should confirm that the challenged ruling was reduced to writing, signed, and included in the appellate record before pursuing an appeal.