LAW.coLAW.co

Priscilla Franks v. Darrell Mayfield

2026-08-13

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

Opinion issued August 13, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

NO. 01-26-00271-CV

PRISCILLA FRANKS, Appellant

V.

DARRELL MAYFIELD, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 4

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1269292

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The Court issued a notice to appellant, Priscilla Franks, who is proceeding pro

se, advising her that the Court might dismiss the appeal because it appeared that the notice of appeal was not timely filed.1 Appellant responded to the Court’s notice on

August 7, 2026, but her response failed to establish this Court’s jurisdiction. We

dismiss the appeal.

Appellant is appealing from an order signed on March 6, 2026, denying her

emergency motion for temporary relief and for restraining order and injunction to

stop eviction, for which appellee had been granted judgment in another court. The

trial court signed an order denying appellant’s motion for a temporary injunction on

February 3, 2026 and signed an order denying her emergency motion to determine

rent pending appeal, to contest rent registry enforcement, and to challenge

jurisdiction on March 6, 2026.

An order denying an emergency motion to determine rent is not a final

judgment. A final judgment is one that disposes of all parties and claims. See

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). The March 6, 2026

order from which appellant seeks an appeal is not an order disposing of all parties

and claims. Moreover, no statute permits appeal from this interlocutory order.

An order denying a request for a temporary injunction is an interlocutory order

which may be appealed as provided by statute. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE

1

Appellee filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, but this motion failed to

explain the basis for dismissal and thus, the Court issued a notice providing

appellant with the apparent basis for dismissal and requested a response from

appellant, establishing our jurisdiction.

2

§ 51.014(a) (permitting appeal from interlocutory order granting or refusing a

temporary injunction). An appeal from an order denying an application for a

temporary injunction is an accelerated appeal for which the notice of appeal must be

filed within 20 days after the order is signed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b).

The order denying appellant’s request for a temporary injunction was signed

on February 3, 2026, and thus, the notice of appeal was due by February 23, a date

20 days after the order was signed. Appellant did not file her notice of appeal until

March 11, 2026. The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal

if, within 15 days after the deadline for filing it, appellant files the notice of appeal

in the trial court and files a motion for extension of time in the appellate court. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. However, the fifteenth day after the deadline was March 10,

2026. Because the notice of appeal was not filed by the deadline or within 15 days

of the deadline, it was not timely filed. When a notice of appeal is not timely filed,

the appellate court’s jurisdiction is not invoked and it must dismiss the appeal. See

Gantt v. Gantt, 208 S.W.3d 27, 30 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet.

denied).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justice Guerra, Gunn, and Morgan.

3