Court Opinion

ID: 4456464
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-11-16 03:12:54.732029+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:53:31.392369
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-19-00353-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

TATIYANA GENEVA ALTECOR,                                                    Appellant,

                                           v.

ALLEN MICHAEL EGAN AND
UNITED PROPERTY AND
CASUALTY INSURANCE,                                Appellees.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 370th District Court
                   of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION
  Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Tijerina
          Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

      Appellant, Tatiyana Geneva Altecor, filed an appeal from the trial court’s denial of

her motion to allocate settlement funds in cause number C-2974-17-G currently pending

in the 370th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. This cause is before the Court on
appellee United’s motion to dismiss the appeal, appellant’s response, and the appellate

record.

       Appellant’s notice of appeal seeks to appeal the trial court’s ruling on her motion

to allocate settlement funds. Upon review of the record, it appears there is no written

order for this Court to consider. In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only

have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by

statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Because there

is no final judgment or order subject to appeal, the notice of appeal is premature. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 27.1(a).

       The Court, having considered the record, appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal,

and appellant’s response, is of the opinion that the motion to dismiss should be granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3(a). Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

                                                              DORI CONTRERAS
                                                              Chief Justice

Delivered and filed the
14th day of November, 2019.

                                            2