in the Matter of Jesse (Jesus) Soliz and Charlotte P. Soliz
This text of in the Matter of Jesse (Jesus) Soliz and Charlotte P. Soliz (in the Matter of Jesse (Jesus) Soliz and Charlotte P. Soliz) 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
NUMBER 13-15-00320-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
IN THE MATTER OF JESSE (JESUS) SOLIZ AND CHARLOTTE P. SOLIZ ____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Jesse (Jesus) Soliz, proceeding pro se, attempted to perfect an appeal
from an order entered by the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause
number 2013-FAM-2812-C. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared
that the order from which this appeal was taken was not a final appealable order. The
Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct
the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised
that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the
Court’s notice.
In the instant case, appellant seeks to appeal a final decree of divorce but has not
furnished us with a copy of the judgment subject to appeal. The clerk of the trial court
advises us that the trial court has not rendered a final judgment in this cause.
Accordingly, the Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to
correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for
want of jurisdiction. See id. R. 42.3(a),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR
WANT OF JURISDICTION.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 17th day of September, 2015.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in the Matter of Jesse (Jesus) Soliz and Charlotte P. Soliz, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-jesse-jesus-soliz-and-charlotte-p-soliz-texapp-2015.