ELIO BOTELLO AND MCALLEN PRODUCE TERMINAL MARKET OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. FIDEICOMISO LIQUIDADOR DE INSTITUCIONES Y ORGANIZACIONES AUXILIARES DE CREDITO--Appeal from County Court at Law No 4 of Hidalgo County
Annotate this Case
NUMBER 13-02-207-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________
ELIO BOTELLO AND McALLEN PRODUCE TERMINAL
MARKET OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellants,
v.
FIDEICOMISO LIQUIDADOR DE INSTITUCIONES
Y ORGANIZACIONES AUXILLIARES DE CREDITO, Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4
of Hidalgo County, Texas
___________________________________________________________________
O P I N I O N
Before Justices Yanez, Rodriguez, and Castillo
Opinion Per Curiam
Appellants, ELIO BOTELLO AND McALLEN PRODUCE TERMINAL MARKET OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-37,770-D. The order granting temporary injunction in this cause was signed on January 25, 2002. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b), appellants notice of appeal was due on February 14, 2002, but was not filed until March 8, 2002.
Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellants were 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 appellants.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants failure to timely perfect their appeal, and appellants 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
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P.47.3.
Opinion delivered and filed this
the 16th day of May, 2002.
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.