Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Juan Adame, et al Appeal from 80th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 1, 2022. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00654-CV UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant V. JUAN ADAME, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF AMELIA ADAME (DECEASED); TONY ALVARADO; CAROLINE ANDREWS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF JEROME JOHNSON, SR. (DECEASED); VANESSA BARCUS; DEBRA BARNES; DEBRA BARNES; VERNA BATTLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WALTER PARKER (DECEASED); KELLY BLACKSHEAR; FRANKIE BOSTON; ELLIS BROUSSARD; SHIRLEY BROUSSARD, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ELLIS BROUSSARD, SR. (DECEASED); EARNESTINE BROWN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF BENJAMIN BROWN (DECEASED); LINDA BROWN; DONALD BRYANT; WENDELL BUTLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF HELEN BUTLER (DECEASED); ALFONSO CANTU; FRANCISCO CASAS; JOANNA CASEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MITCHELLE LOVE (DECEASED); TONNA COLE; KATHY COMB; LAWANDA COMBS; DIANA COOK; ARTHUR CORMIER; DANNY CORNELIUS JR, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF SHARRON CORNELIUS (DECEASED); VELMA CRISWELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LAMAR LARKIN (DECEASED); FRED CROWDER; GLORIA CRUZ; LEE DAVIS; REGINALD DAVIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF BARBARA DAVIS (DECEASED); KISHA DOUGLAS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATES OF MURPHY DOUGLAS (DECEASED) AND MARGIE DOUGLAS (DECEASED); MATTHEW EVANS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH EVANS (DECEASED); MICHELLE FISCHER; ROBERT FLORENCE JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESETATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JOTHLE FLORENCE AND ROBERT FLORENCE (DECEASED); MARY FORD; TURKISHA FULLER; TORRENCE TYRONE GAVIN; T-ETTA GAYLES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESETATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF EVELYN GAYLES (DECEASED); ELLIOTT ANTHONY GOOSBY; EVELYN GORDON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF FRANK JAMES BRYAN, SR. (DECEASED); ARCHIE JEROME HAMPTON; W.D. HATTER; WHITNEY HATTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF VERONICA DAWSON (DECEASED); SAMUEL HEARNE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ROBERTA HEARNE (DECEASED) AND SAM HEARNE (DECEASED); JEANETTE HELAIRE; LEWIS HENDERSON; CHARLOTTE HENSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HELEN HENSON (DECEASED); MAXINE HILL PACE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF BERNICE HILL (DECEASED); COY HOOEY; JOYCE HUDSON; ROBERT HUNT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WANDA HUNT (DECEASED); FLORENCE JACKSON; MADELYN JACKSON; REGINALD JOHNSON; ANTHONY JOHNSON; CARL JONES; LUCY JOSEPH, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF FELTON JOSEPH (DECEASED); MR. JOSEPH LEWIS; JULITA LEWIS; CHARLES LONDON; DOROTHY MANUEL; MICKY MARTIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF GEORGE DAVIS (DECEASED); CARL MARTIN; PATRICK MARTIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARY TOMPKINS (DECEASED); JOHNNY MINOR; CHARLES MOSLEY; ANGELA MYERS; SANDRA NORMAN; GLORIA PALMER; JOEL PARKER; TASHIE PEAVY; DONALD PITMANN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF BERNARD PITTMAN (DECEASED); DON POWELL; JACQUELINE REECE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARGARET ROYAL (DECEASED); MELODY RICHARDSON; GINA SCALES; ERIC SMITH; DAVID STRUGGS; AND ELLA TRAHAN, Appellees On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2021-50465 MEMORANDUM OPINION This is a statutory interloutory appeal from an order signed November 1, 2021. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ยงยง 27.003, 51.015(12). On August 23, 2022, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). The motion is granted. We dismiss the appeal. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Spain, Poissant, and Wilson.
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.
