Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2015

Ronald Dwayne Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan and Santander Consumer USA

Ronald Dwayne Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan and Santander Consumer USA
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided September 24, 2015

Ronald Dwayne Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan and Santander Consumer USA

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER ON MOTION Cause number: 01-15-00645-CV Style: Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan and Santander Consumer USA, Inc. Date motion filed*: September 14, 2015 Type of motion: Amended Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Jurisdiction and Motions to Strike and for Sanctions Parties filing motion: Pro Se Appellant Document to be filed: N/A Is appeal accelerated? No. Ordered that motion is:  Granted  Denied  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)  Other: _____________________________________ Although the pro se appellant listed several appellate and trial court cause numbers on his motion, it was handwritten over the typed answer and original counterclaim of a First Service Credit Union (“FSCU”), and apparently seeks the dismissal or striking of FCSU’s answer filed in the unrelated trial court cause number 2015-45473. According to the trial clerk’s website, while FSCU is listed as a defendant and cross-plaintiff in No. 2015-45473, there has been no notice of appeal filed in that case. Furthermore, FSCU is neither listed as an appellee nor cross-appellant in this appellate cause number 01-15-00645-CV. Accordingly, appellant’s amended motion to dismiss appeal for want of jurisdiction and motions to strike and for sanctions is dismissed as moot because FSCU is not a party to this appeal and has not filed a cross-appeal.

Judge's signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes  Date: September 24, 2015 November 7, 2008 Revision

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