David George Baugh v. Isaacs Wrecker Service, LLC, Keith Isaacs, Sammie Isaacs, Travis Cearley, Daniel Franklin, Jason Price, Reece Daniel and John Page

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 19, 2010
• Docket: 12-10-00043-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NO. 12-10-00043-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DAVID GEORGE BAUGH,                                    §                      APPEAL FROM THE 2ND

APPELLANT

V.                                                                   

ISAACS WRECKER SERVICE, LLC,        §                      JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

KEITH ISAACS, SAMMIE ISAACS,

TRAVIS CEARLEY, DANIEL

FRANKLIN, JASON PRICE,

REECE DANIEL AND JOHN PAGE,

APPELLEES                                                 §                      CHEROKEE COUNTY, TEXAS

---

                                                      MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                  PER CURIAM

            Appellant, David George Baugh, attempts to appeal the trial court’s dismissal of his suit after granting the plea to the jurisdiction filed by Appellees, Isaacs Wrecker Service, LLC, Keith Isaacs, Sammie Isaacs, Travis Cearley, Daniel Franklin, Jason Price, Reece Daniel, and John Page.  On February 16, 2010, this court notified Baugh that the information received in this appeal does not include a final judgment or other appealable order.  Therefore, the record does not show that this court has jurisdiction of the appeal.  Baugh was further notified that his appeal would be dismissed if the information received in the appeal was not amended on or before February 26, 2010 to show the jurisdiction of this court. 

In response to this court’s February 16, 2010 notice, Baugh filed a motion to extend the time for providing a final judgment or other appealable order.  The motion was granted, and the time was extended to April 26, 2010.  On April 20, 2010, Baugh filed a second motion to extend the time for providing the requisite final judgment or other appealable order.  That motion was granted, and the time was extended to May 5, 2010.  The May 5 deadline has now passed, and we have not received a final judgment or other appealable order in this appeal.  Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 37.2, 42.3.

By per curiam opinion May 19, 2010.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)