Texas Business Telecommunication Services, Inc. v. Potomac Leasing Company & Glo Dean Taylor D/B/A Glodene Ente

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 5, 2021
Docket05-85-01392-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Texas Business Telecommunication Services, Inc. v. Potomac Leasing Company & Glo Dean Taylor D/B/A Glodene Ente (Texas Business Telecommunication Services, Inc. v. Potomac Leasing Company & Glo Dean Taylor D/B/A Glodene Ente) 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
Texas Business Telecommunication Services, Inc. v. Potomac Leasing Company & Glo Dean Taylor D/B/A Glodene Ente, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 5, 2021

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-85-01392-CV

TEXAS BUSINESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES, INC., Appellant V. POTOMAC LEASING COMPANY & GLO DEAN TAYLOR D/B/A GLODENE ENTE, Appellees

On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 85-4608-H

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Goldstein, and Justice Smith Opinion by Chief Justice Burns We reinstate this appeal. This case was abated in 1986 due to bankruptcy. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. The Court conducted an independent review of the federal Public

Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system which shows the bankruptcy

case associated with this appeal was closed on May 31, 1989, effectively dissolving

the automatic stay.

We notified the parties by letter, requesting they inform the Court of the status

of the bankruptcy and of this appeal. We cautioned that the failure to respond would

result in the appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. 42.3(b),(c). To date, neither party has responded. The letter to appellant’s attorney was returned

because the address was no longer current. Appellant’s counsel has not withdrawn

from representation and has failed to provide the Court with an up-to-date address.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5; 5th Tex. App. (Dallas) Loc. R. 2.

Because we gave the parties an opportunity to show why we should not

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and no one responded, we dismiss this

appeal. See id. 42.3(b),(c); Brewer v. Admiral Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31312990, at *1

(Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 16, 2002, no writ) (per curiam) (not designated for

publication).

/Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

851392F.P05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

TEXAS BUSINESS On Appeal from the 160th Judicial TELECOMMUNICATION District Court, Dallas County, Texas SERVICES, INC., Appellant Trial Court Cause No. 85-4608-H. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice No. 05-85-01392-CV V. Burns. Justices Goldstein and Smith participating. POTOMAC LEASING COMPANY & GLO DEAN TAYLOR D/B/A GLODENE ENTE, Appellees

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

Judgment entered May 5, 2021

–3–

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Texas Business Telecommunication Services, Inc. v. Potomac Leasing Company & Glo Dean Taylor D/B/A Glodene Ente, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/texas-business-telecommunication-services-inc-v-potomac-leasing-company-texapp-2021.