Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers v. City of Austin and Delta Air Lines, Inc.
This text of Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers v. City of Austin and Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers v. City of Austin and Delta Air Lines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-11-00563-CV
Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers, Appellants
v.
City of Austin and Delta Air Lines, Inc., Appellees
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-GN-09-001135, HONORABLE TIM SULAK, JUDGE PRESIDING
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellants Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers appeal the trial court's order granting summary judgment for appellee Delta Air Lines, Inc. Appellants have filed a motion to abate their appeal with this Court. They state that the order is not a final appealable order because it was not severed from claims for contribution that exist between Delta and appellee the City of Austin. See Teer v. Duddlesten, 664 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Tex. 1984) (without severance, summary judgment which does not dispose of all parties and issues is interlocutory and not appealable). Appellants also certify that appellees do not oppose their motion to abate.
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 27.2 provides that an appellate court may permit a party to cure a prematurely filed appeal by allowing "an appealed order that is not final to be modified so as to be made final and may allow the modified order and all proceedings relating to it to be included in a supplemental record." Tex. R. App. P. 27.2. We, therefore, grant appellants' motion to abate this appeal to give them 60 days after the date of this order to take action to cure the jurisdictional defect and to pay for and request a supplemental clerk's record containing a signed order of severance or an order otherwise disposing of remaining claims. Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a); Iacono v. Lyons, 6 S.W.3d 715, 717 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, order).
__________________________________________
Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Rose and Goodwin
Abated
Filed: October 18, 2011
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Cheryl Rogers and Don Rogers v. City of Austin and Delta Air Lines, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cheryl-rogers-and-don-rogers-v-city-of-austin-and--texapp-2011.