Markus Stauder v. Gabriele Stauder-Hilpold--Appeal from 214th District Court of Nueces County

Annotate this Case
/**/

NUMBER 13-05-305-CV

 

COURT OF APPEALS

 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

 

MARKUS STAUDER, Appellant,

 

v.

 

GABRIELE STAUDER-HILPOLD, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

 

On appeal from the 214th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Before Justices Ya ez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellant, MARKUS STAUDER, attempted to perfect an appeal from an interlocutory order entered by the 214th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 03-7257-F. The order in this cause was signed on February 28, 2005. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b), appellant s notice of appeal was due on March 20, 2005, but was not filed until May 4, 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. Appellee has filed an emergency motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and for sanctions and an emergency motion to refer enforcement of interlocutory order to trial court. Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal and response to appellee s request for sanctions and for referral to trial court.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellee s motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. Appellee s motion for sanctions is DENIED. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 19th day of May, 2005.

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.