Neely v. Paredes

Court of Appeals of Texas

Neely v. Paredes

252 S.W.3d 419, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 5246, 1999 WL 497396

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJuly 15, 1999

Docket01-98-00279-CV

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 252 S.W.3d 419 (Neely v. Paredes) 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

Neely v. Paredes, 252 S.W.3d 419, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 5246, 1999 WL 497396 (Tex. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

After examining the record, this Court did not find a final, appealable judgment disposing of all the parties and claims in the trial court cause no. 97-51928. 1 On *420 June 24, 1999, we ordered that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, unless within 15 days of the order, appellant paid for and the district clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record demonstrating that there is a final judgment, or appellant filed a brief demonstrating that there is a final judgment. See Tex. R.App.P. 42.3(a). Appellant has not done so. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

It is so ORDERED.

1

. Generally, Texas appellate courts have jurisdiction only over final judgments. North E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966). A judgment is final and ap-pealable if it disposes of all issues and parties. Id. The exceptions to this rule are not relevant in this case. See generally Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 51.014 (Vernon Supp.1999).

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

After examining the record, this Court did not find a final, appealable judgment disposing of all the parties and claims in the trial court cause no. 97-51928. 1 On *420 June 24, 1999, we ordered that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, unless within 15 days of the order, appellant paid for and the district clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record demonstrating that there is a final judgment, or appellant filed a brief demonstrating that there is a final judgment. See Tex. R.App.P. 42.3(a). Appellant has not done so. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

It is so ORDERED.

1

. Generally, Texas appellate courts have jurisdiction only over final judgments. North E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966). A judgment is final and ap-pealable if it disposes of all issues and parties. Id. The exceptions to this rule are not relevant in this case. See generally Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 51.014 (Vernon Supp.1999).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 S.W.3d 419, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 5246, 1999 WL 497396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neely-v-paredes-texapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack