Court Opinion

ID: 2860762
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 20:55:24.814055+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:35.645765
License: Public Domain

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="WordPerfect 9">
<TITLE></TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000ff" VLINK="#551a8b" ALINK="#ff0000" BGCOLOR="#c0c0c0">

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 14pt"><STRONG><CENTER>TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN</STRONG></SPAN></CENTER>
</P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><HR ALIGN="CENTER" WIDTH="26%">
</P>
<STRONG><CENTER>NO. 03-9<A NAME="1">7</A>-00<A NAME="2">137</A>-CV</CENTER>
</STRONG>

<P><HR ALIGN="CENTER" WIDTH="26%">
</P>

<STRONG></STRONG><CENTER><A NAME="3">Socorro Independent School District</A>, et al., Appellants</CENTER>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>v.</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER><A NAME="4">State Board of Education of the State of Texas</A>, Appellee</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><HR SIZE="3">
</STRONG></P>
<SPAN STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF <A NAME="5">TRAVIS</A> COUNTY, <A NAME="6">250TH</A> JUDICIAL DISTRICT</CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>NO. <A NAME="7">96-10863</A>, HONORABLE <A NAME="8">F. SCOTT McCOWN</A>, JUDGE PRESIDING </STRONG></SPAN><STRONG></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><HR SIZE="3">
</STRONG></P>

<STRONG>PER CURIAM</STRONG>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P>	After the trial court signed a final judgment, the appellants tendered a transcript in this
Court.  The clerk of this Court marked it received, but declined to file it because it lacked a perfecting
instrument.  That lack prevented this Court from knowing who intended to bring the appeal.  The clerk
informed appellants' counsel of the lack of a perfecting instrument.</P>

<P>	In response, appellants' counsel has informed this Court that the trial court has filed a
subsequent order modifying judgment that rendered the judgment interlocutory.  Counsel attached a copy
of the order.  Counsel stated that the appellants therefore did not plan to perfect this appeal.</P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P>	We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction because the appeal was not perfected and
because we are not alleged to have jurisdiction for an interlocutory appeal of the order modifying judgment.</P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P>Before Justices Powers, Jones and Kidd</P>

<P>Appeal Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction</P>

<P>Filed:    July 3, 1997</P>

<P>Do Not Publish</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>