Sanadco Inc., a Texas Corporation Mahmoud Ahmed Isba Broadway Grocery, Inc. Shariz, Inc. Ruby & Sons Store, Inc. And Rubina Noorani v. Glenn Hegar, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Comptroller of Public Accounts Office of Comptroller of Public Accounts for the State of Texas And Ken Paxton, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of Texas
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-15-00430-CV
Sanadco Inc., a Texas Corporation; Mahmoud Ahmed Isba; Broadway Grocery, Inc.;
Shariz, Inc.; Ruby & Sons Store, Inc.; and Rubina Noorani, Appellants
v.
Glenn Hegar, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Comptroller of Public Accounts;
Office of Comptroller of Public Accounts for The State of Texas; and Ken Paxton, in his
Official Capacity as Attorney General of The State of Texas, Appellees
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 200TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-GN-13-004352, HONORABLE KARIN CRUMP, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 13, 2015, appellants Sanadco Inc., Mahmoud Ahmed Isba, Broadway
Grocery, Inc., Shariz, Inc., Ruby & Sons Store, Inc., and Rubina Noorani filed a notice of appeal,
stating they were appealing from the trial court’s order denying their application for a temporary
restraining order and temporary injunction. On August 19, 2015, they filed in this Court a motion
to extend the time for filing the record, explaining that “[i]t now appears that the judgment appealed
from was not a final judgment because it was a denial of temporary orders, and not on the merits
of the case, thus the appeal may not be pursued until a hearing on the merits is conducted.” Rather
than dismiss, we abated the appeal on August 27, 2015, in hopes of allowing for the entry of a final
judgment. We have since extended the abatement several times. On September 6, 2016, appellants
filed a new status report, stating that the case was “tentatively set for trial” on October 12, 2016, and
asking that we continue the abatement for at least another ninety days, into December 2016.
This cause has been abated for more than a year and still has not reached trial.
Rather than continue to extend the abatement indefinitely, the appeal will be dismissed for want
of jurisdiction. Once the case has been tried and judgment has been entered, appellants will have
the opportunity to file a proper notice of appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of
jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
__________________________________________
David Puryear, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: September 14, 2016
2