Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal.

DecidedNovember 9, 2006

Docket13-05-00573-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal. (Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal.) 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

Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal., (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-05-573-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

REYNALDO F. MORALES, ET AL., Appellants,

v.

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, ET AL., Appellees.

On appeal from the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, REYNALDO F. MORALES, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause 98-0394-G.

A review of the documents on file in this cause fails to affirmatively reflect that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. First, it does not appear that the order from which this appeal is taken is a final, appealable judgment. Second, it appears that the parties have filed suggestions of bankruptcy; however, the documents on file fail to reflect that any bankruptcy stay has been lifted or the case otherwise remanded to the trial court. Finally, based on the documents on file, we are unable to determine whether the notice of appeal was timely filed. 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 respond to 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 9th day of November, 2006.

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

NUMBER 13-05-573-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

REYNALDO F. MORALES, ET AL., Appellants,

v.

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, ET AL., Appellees.

On appeal from the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, REYNALDO F. MORALES, ET AL., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause 98-0394-G.

A review of the documents on file in this cause fails to affirmatively reflect that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal. First, it does not appear that the order from which this appeal is taken is a final, appealable judgment. Second, it appears that the parties have filed suggestions of bankruptcy; however, the documents on file fail to reflect that any bankruptcy stay has been lifted or the case otherwise remanded to the trial court. Finally, based on the documents on file, we are unable to determine whether the notice of appeal was timely filed. 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 respond to 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 9th day of November, 2006.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Reynaldo F. Morales v. Union Carbide Corporation, Etal., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynaldo-f-morales-v-union-carbide-corporation-eta-texapp-2006.