Court Opinion

ID: 2923278
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 03:28:46.117715+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:35:07.392481
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-05-572-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
__________________________________________________________________
 
MAXIMINO R. ALEMAN, ET AL.,                               Appellants,
 
                                           v.
 
UNION
CARBIDE CORPORATION, ET AL.,                    Appellees.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                  On appeal from the 319th
District Court
                           of Nueces
County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
                  Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and
Castillo
                             Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
 
Appellants, MAXIMINO R. ALEMAN, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from an
order entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces
County, Texas, in cause no. 01-02196-G.  The clerk=s record was received on March 16,
2006.  

A review of the clerk=s record in this cause
fails to  affirmatively reflect that this
Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. 
First, the record fails to reflect that the order from which this appeal
is taken is a final, appealable judgment. 
Second, it appears that several parties have filed suggestions of
bankruptcy; however, the record fails to reflect that any bankruptcy stay has
been lifted or the case otherwise remanded to the trial court.  Finally, it does not appear that the notice
of appeal was timely filed.  Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, notice of these
defects was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defects, if it
could be done.  Appellants were advised
that, if the defects were not corrected within ten days from the date of
receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction.  Appellants failed to file
a response as requested by this Court=s notice. 
The Court, having
considered the documents on file and appellants= failure to respond to this Court=s notice, is of the
opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The
appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.
PER CURIAM
 
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this
the 8th day of June, 2006.