Robert Rene Yerena v. Juana Ulloa a/k/a Guadalupe Yerena Appeal from 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-19-00444-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ ROBERT RENE YERENA, Appellant, v. JUANA ULLOA A/K/A GUADALUPE YERENA, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides Appellant Robert Rene Yerena attempted to perfect an appeal from various orders rendered in trial court cause number C-4570-17-A in the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that the orders from which this appeal was taken were not final and appealable orders. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. The Clerk advised appellant that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice. Appellant failed to respond to the Court’s notice. Generally, appellate courts have jurisdiction only over appeals from final judgments. See City of Watauga v. Gordon, 434 S.W.3d 586, 588 (Tex. 2014); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Further, appellate courts have jurisdiction to consider appeals of interlocutory orders only if a statute explicitly provides for such an appeal. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840 (Tex. 2007); see City of Watauga, 434 S.W.3d at 588. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. We DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c). Pending motions, if any, are likewise dismissed. GINA M. BENAVIDES, Justice Delivered and filed the 24th day of October, 2019. 2
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.
