Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
O. E. INVESTMENTS, LTD., ET AL., Appellants, v. MARJORIE LYNN BRAND FERRELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE KATHRYN L. BRAND REVOCABLE MANAGEMENT TRUST, Appellee.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellants, “O. E. Investments, Ltd. and Othal E. Brand Jr., (‘Plaintiffs') and O. E. Investments, Ltd., converted and reorganized from O.E. Investments, Inc., Trophy International, Inc., General Partner of O. E. Investments, Inc. and Othal E. Brand Jr. (‘Counter-Defendants')” attemped to perfect an appeal from an “Order on Pending Summary Judgment Motions” signed on April 14, 2016, in cause no. C-0367-13-E in the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that there was no final, appealable judgment or order. On May 20, 2016, 2011, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellants were advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. More than ten days have passed and appellants have not responded to the Court's notice or otherwise corrected the defect.
The Hidalgo County Clerk's Office has informed this Court that no final judgment has been rendered in this cause. In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001).
The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants' failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c).
PER CURIAM
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: NUMBER 13-16-00272-CV
Decided: July 01, 2016
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi-Edinburg.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)