CourtListener 10842235•Bianca Fox v. Cypress at Stone Oak
Full text
Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-26-00120-CV
Bianca FOX,
Appellant
v.
CYPRESS at Stone Oak,
Appellee
From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2023-CV-01033
Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Irene Rios, Justice
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 8, 2026
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
On February 12, 2026, appellant Bianca Fox, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal
purporting to appeal a turnover order signed on January 30, 2026. The clerk’s record contains no
turnover order signed on January 30, 2026. Instead, the clerk’s record contains two interlocutory
orders signed on January 30, 2026, those being: (1) an order denying Fox’s motion for protection,
and (2) an order requiring Fox to comply with a subpoena. It appears that Fox intends to appeal
from these interlocutory orders. See Pelt v. State Bd. Of Ins., 802 S.W.2d 822, 826 (Tex. App.—
04-26-00120-CV
Austin 1990, no writ) (holding that an order denying a motion to quash subpoena is not
appealable); see also RWLS L.L.C. v. Gray Wireline Service, Inc., 359 S.W.3d 927, 928 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2012, pet. denied) (per curiam, sub. op. on reh’g) (holding that an
order denying stay and compelling compliance with subpoena is not appealable).
“Unless specifically authorized by statute, Texas appellate courts have jurisdiction only to
review final judgments.” McFadin v. Broadway Coffeehouse, LLC, 539 S.W.3d 278, 283 (Tex.
2018). Accordingly, this court ordered appellant to show cause in writing by March 18, 2026, why
this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant has filed no response.
Because neither a final judgment nor an interlocutory order that may afford an authorized
interlocutory appeal has been signed in the underlying cause, this appeal is dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a) (appellate court may dismiss an appeal for lack of
jurisdiction).
PER CURIAM
1
All pending motions are denied as moot.
-2-
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.