Joe S. Carrion v. A. W. Chesterton Company

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 26, 2006
• Docket: 13-05-00636-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                                           NUMBER 13-05-636-CV

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________________________________

JOE S. CARRION, ET AL.,                                                             Appellants,

                                                             v.

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

__________________________________________________________________

                             On appeal from the 319^th District Court

                                        of Nueces County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION

              Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Garza

                                   Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, Joe S. Carrion, et al., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the Honorable Thomas F. Greenwell of the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause no. 04-06983-G.

On October 17, 2005, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants that, upon review of the documents on file, it appeared that the trial court granted a severance in cause no. 04-06983-G; however, a new cause number had not yet been assigned to the severed cause due to unpaid fees with the Nueces County District Clerk=s office.  Accordingly, the cause number in which the notice of appeal was filed did not contain a final appealable judgment.  Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3, 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 notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellants= response to this Court=s letter fails to explain or otherwise correct the defect..

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants= response to the Clerk=s letter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.  All pending motions are denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 26^th day of January, 2006.