Sewell, George Edward, Et Al v. Pittsburgh Corning Corporation Appeal from 44th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 28, 2021 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-00-01405-CV GEORGE EDWARD SEWELL AND ELIZABETH UDELL, Appellants V. PITTSBURGH CORNING CORPORATION, Appellee On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 96-04255-B MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness We reinstate this appeal. In 2000, we abated this case due to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation’s 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 terminated on April 18, 2019, 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. 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). /Robbie Partida-Kipness/ ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS JUSTICE 001405F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT GEORGE EDWARD SEWELL and ELIZABETH UDALL, Appellants No. 05-00-01405-CV On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 96-04255-B. Opinion delivered by Justice PartidaKipness. Justices Myers and Garcia participating. V. PITTSBURGH CORNING CORPORATION, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. Judgment entered May 28, 2021 –3–

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.