Alper Karaali v. Petroleum Wholesale, L.P.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 25, 2012
• Docket: 14-11-00577-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Motion Denied; Abatement Order filed October 25, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-11-00577-CV ____________

TIEN SHAN, INC AND ALPER KARAALI, Appellant

v.

PETROLEUM WHOLESALE, L.P., Appellees

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2007-46858

CONTINUING ABATEMENT ORDER

On September 8, 2011, this court issued an abatement order because we were notified that appellant Tien Shan, Inc. had petitioned for voluntary bankruptcy protection under cause number 11-37546-H3-11. We have now been advised that appellant Alper Karaali also petitioned for bankruptcy protection under cause number 12-31228-H3-11. A bankruptcy suspends the appeal from the date when the bankruptcy petition is filed until the appellate court reinstates the appeal in accordance with federal law. Tex. R. App. P. 8.2. When a case has been suspended by a bankruptcy filing, a party may move the appellate court to reinstate the appeal if permitted by federal law or the bankruptcy court. Tex. R. App. P. 8.3. If the bankruptcy court has lifted or terminated the stay, a certified copy of the order must be attached to the motion. Id. A party filing a motion to reinstate shall specify what further action, if any, is required from this court when the appeal is reinstated. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a).

On October 2, 2012, appellant Alper T. Karaali filed a motion to reinstate the appeal. Appellant included a copy of the bankruptcy court’s order signed March 30, 2012, dismissing his personal bankruptcy. Appellant did not provide proof that the corporate bankrupty has been dismissed. Moreover, as stated in appellee’s response in opposition to appellant’s motion, appellant filed the motion to reinstate without counsel. Appellant Tien Shan, Inc., a corporation, may not proceed without counsel. Except for the performance of ministerial tasks, corporations may appear and be represented only by a licensed attorney. Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp., U.S.A., 937 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996); see also Dell Dev. Corp. v. Best. Indus. Uniform Sup. Co., 743 S.W.2d 302, 303 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ denied).

Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion and ORDER the abatement of the appeal to continue. For administrative purposes only, and without surrendering jurisdiction, the appeal remains abated and treated as a closed case until further order of this court.

PER CURIAM