Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2006

Jorge Alberto Coronado v. Militza Coria Coronado

Jorge Alberto Coronado v. Militza Coria Coronado
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided February 16, 2006

Jorge Alberto Coronado v. Militza Coria Coronado

Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

                             NUMBER 13-05-783-CV

 

                         COURT OF APPEALS

 

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

 

JORGE ALBERTO CORONADO,                                   Appellant,

 

                                           v.

 

MILITZA CORIA CORONADO,                                      Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

 

                  On appeal from the 107th District Court

                           of Cameron County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

 

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

                Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 


Appellant, JORGE ALBERTO CORONADO, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2005-08-4446-A.  Judgment in this cause was signed on November 3, 2005.  An untimely motion for new trial was filed on December 6, 2005.  Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant=s notice of appeal was due on December 5, 2005, but was not filed until December 16, 2005. 

Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done.  Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court=s letter, the appeal would be dismissed.  To date, no response has been received from appellant.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant=s 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 16th day of February, 2006.

 

 

 

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.