Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company

Court of Appeals of Texas

Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company

DecidedJune 8, 2006

Docket13-05-00634-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company (Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company) 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

Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-05-634-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

JERRY BAROS, ET AL., Appellants,

v.

A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, ET AL., Appellees.

On appeal from the 319th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, JERRY BAROS, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause 98-06468-G. The clerk=s record was received on March 10, 2006.

A review of the clerk=s record in this cause fails to affirmatively reflect that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. First, the record fails to reflect that the order from which this appeal is taken is a final, appealable judgment. Second, it appears that parties have filed suggestions of bankruptcy; however, the record fails to reflect that any bankruptcy stay has been lifted or the case otherwise remanded to the trial court. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, notice of these defects was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defects, if it could be done. Appellants were advised that, if the defects were not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellants failed to file a response as requested by this Court=s notice.

The Court, having considered the documents on file 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 8th day of June, 2006.

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

NUMBER 13-05-634-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

JERRY BAROS, ET AL., Appellants,

v.

A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, ET AL., Appellees.

On appeal from the 319th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, JERRY BAROS, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause 98-06468-G. The clerk=s record was received on March 10, 2006.

A review of the clerk=s record in this cause fails to affirmatively reflect that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. First, the record fails to reflect that the order from which this appeal is taken is a final, appealable judgment. Second, it appears that parties have filed suggestions of bankruptcy; however, the record fails to reflect that any bankruptcy stay has been lifted or the case otherwise remanded to the trial court. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3, notice of these defects was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defects, if it could be done. Appellants were advised that, if the defects were not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellants failed to file a response as requested by this Court=s notice.

The Court, having considered the documents on file 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 8th day of June, 2006.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jerry Baros v. A. W. Chesterton Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-baros-v-a-w-chesterton-company-texapp-2006.