Following rendition of a final, appealable judgment, does a notice of appeal have to name all preceeding interlocutory orders as a prerequisite to complaining of those orders?  Apparently not.  This has been a question of concern for many appellate practitioners and it’s a question that’s been percolating around in the courts of appeals.  We now have an answer. 

In Perry v. Cohen, Defendants filed special exceptions to the Plaintiffs’ petition, which were sustained and the trial court ordered Plaintiffs to replead.  Subsequently, Plaintiffs filed an amended petition, and Defendants moved to dismiss because the amendment failed to comply with the order on the special exceptions.  The trial court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims.

On appeal, Defendants argued that Plaintiffs had waived their complaints because their notice of appeal listed only the order of dismissal, and not the order sustaining the special exceptions.   The Texas Supreme Court held that Plaintiffs "were required only to state the date of the judgment or order appealed from–in this instance the order dismissing their suit."  The Court’s opinion also goes on to examine whether Plaintiffs also preserved error by challenging both orders in their brief and concludes under its rules requiring liberal construction of briefs that Plaintiffs preserved error.  The Court’s opinion may be found at this link.