Ilumina, Inc. and Olivier Van Der Graaff v. Chk, Inc. D/B/A the Light House

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 7, 2005
Docket13-04-00672-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Ilumina, Inc. and Olivier Van Der Graaff v. Chk, Inc. D/B/A the Light House (Ilumina, Inc. and Olivier Van Der Graaff v. Chk, Inc. D/B/A the Light House) 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.

Bluebook
Ilumina, Inc. and Olivier Van Der Graaff v. Chk, Inc. D/B/A the Light House, (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-04-672-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________ ___________


ILUMINA, INC. AND OLIVIER VAN DER GRAAFF,                Appellants,


v.


CHK, INC. D/B/A THE LIGHT HOUSE,                                   Appellee.

__________________________________________ _______________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas

__________________________________________________ _______


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellants, ILUMINA, INC. AND OLIVIER VAN DER GRAAFF, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 3 of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2003-CCL-00957-C. Judgment in this cause was signed on August 25, 2004. An untimely motion for new trial was filed on September 29, 2004. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellants’ notice of appeal was due on September 24, 2004, but was not filed until November 24, 2004.

         Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellants were advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellants.

         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants’ failure to timely perfect their appeal, and appellants’ failure to respond to this Court’s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                               PER CURIAM



Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 7th day of April, 2005.



Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ilumina, Inc. and Olivier Van Der Graaff v. Chk, Inc. D/B/A the Light House, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ilumina-inc-and-olivier-van-der-graaff-v-chk-inc-d-texapp-2005.