MRI Country Bend Investment Fund, L.P. and MRI River Glen Investment Fund, L.P. v. Capitol Painting & Construction, Inc.

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-09-174-CV MRI COUNTRY BEND INVESTMENT                                      APPELLANTS FUND, L.P. AND MRI RIVER GLEN INVESTMENT FUND, L.P. V. CAPITOL PAINTING & APPELLEE CONSTRUCTION, INC. ------------ FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF TARRANT COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM OPINION[1] ------------ Appellants MRI Country Bend Investment Fund, L.P. and MRI River Glen Investment Fund, L.P. attempt to appeal from the trial court=s May 7, 2009, order denying their motion to dissolve pre-judgment writs of garnishment. Appellee Capitol Painting & Construction, Inc. moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the May 7 order is not an appealable interlocutory order and seeks damages as the prevailing party in a frivolous appeal.[2] We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment.[3] Interlocutory orders are not appealable unless they fall within the exceptions provided by the legislature in section 51.014 of the civil practice and remedies code.[4] None of those exceptions apply here. Therefore, we have no jurisdiction over the appeal and must dismiss the case.[5] Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal and appellee=s motion for sanctions. PER CURIAM PANEL: CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ. DELIVERED: July 23, 2009 [1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. [2]See Tex. R. App. P. 45 (stating in part that A[i]f the court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may . . . award each prevailing party just damages@). [3]See Lehmann v. Har‑Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). [4]Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 51.014 (Vernon 2008). [5]Guajardo v. Conwell, 46 S.W.3d 862, 863_64 (Tex. 2001) (dismissal of appeal of interlocutory order); Anderson v. Long, 52 S.W.3d 385, 386 (Tex. App._Fort Worth 2001, no pet.) (same).