Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Tejas Dubey appealed a June 30, 2026 order denying his motion for reconsideration in an underlying divorce and suit affecting the parent-child relationship in Williamson County Court at Law No. 1.
Rashmi Khurana moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that the Third Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction because the reconsideration order neither finally disposed of the entire case nor qualified for a statutorily authorized interlocutory appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The court agreed with Khurana. It explained that appellate jurisdiction generally extends only to final judgments disposing of all pending parties and claims and to interlocutory orders for which a statute expressly authorizes an appeal.
Because the June 30 order did not dispose of all parties and claims, it was not a final judgment. No statute authorized an interlocutory appeal from that order. The court therefore granted Khurana’s motion and dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a).
Key Takeaways
- An order denying reconsideration is not independently appealable when it does not dispose of all parties and claims.
- An interlocutory order may be appealed only when a statute authorizes the appeal.
- The dismissal addressed appellate jurisdiction, not the merits of the underlying divorce or parent-child dispute.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that parties in ongoing family-law proceedings generally cannot obtain immediate appellate review merely by appealing an order denying reconsideration. Before filing an appeal, counsel must identify either a final judgment or a specific statutory basis for interlocutory jurisdiction.