In the Estate of Steve J. Mauro v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 29, 2024
Docket13-24-00309-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In the Estate of Steve J. Mauro v. the State of Texas (In the Estate of Steve J. Mauro v. the State of Texas) 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
In the Estate of Steve J. Mauro v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-24-00309-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN THE ESTATE OF STEVE J. MAURO, DECEASED

ON APPEAL FROM THE PROBATE COURT NO. 1 OF CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Tijerina and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

On June 5, 2024, appellant filed a notice of appeal attempting to appeal an order

granting a motion to vacate an order granting a non-suit in trial court cause number 2019-

CPC-00140. On June 24, 2024, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that it appears

the order identified in the notice of appeal is unappealable. Appellant was further notified

that if the defect was not cured within ten days, the appeal would be dismissed. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3. On July 29, 2024, the Clerk of the Court again notified appellant that it

appears the order identified in the notice of appeal is unappealable. Appellant was again notified that if the defect was not cured within ten days, the appeal would be dismissed.

See id.

Upon review of the clerk’s record, it appears appellant filed a first amended notice

of appeal with the trial court clerk on June 24, 2024; however, appellant’s first amended

notice of appeal did not cure the defect or otherwise demonstrate the appealability of the

order he identifies in the notice of appeal. The Court, having considered the documents

on file and appellant’s failure to identify an appealable order, is of the opinion that the

appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See id. Accordingly, the appeal is

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See id. 42.3(a),(c).

JAIME TIJERINA Justice

Delivered and filed on the 29th day of August, 2024.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In the Estate of Steve J. Mauro v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-estate-of-steve-j-mauro-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.