Royal Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. BMA Assocites, Inc. ( 2021 )

DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 6, 2021
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-91-00354-CV
ROYAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., Appellant
V.
BMA ASSOCIATES, INC., Appellee
On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 90-3209-L
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle
Opinion by Justice Reichek
We reinstate this appeal. This case was abated in 1991 due to bankruptcy. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. The Court conducted an independent review of the federal Public
Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system; however, nothing on that
system indicated that a bankruptcy case was still pending.
We then notified the parties by letter, requesting they inform the Court of the
status of the bankruptcy and of this appeal. We cautioned that the failure to respond
would result in the appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution. See id.
42.3(b),(c). Robert Steinmetz, former counsel for BMA, responded and informed the
Court that, according to the United States bankruptcy clerk he contacted, “the Royal
bankruptcy proceeding was closed in 1994.” Although Steinmetz copied Joe Abby,
counsel for Royal Manufacturing Company, Inc., neither Mr. Abby nor anyone else
representing that party has responded or communicated with the Court.
Because we gave the parties an opportunity to show why we should not
dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and no one representing appellant
responded, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id. 42.3(b),(c).
/Amanda L. Reichek/
AMANDA L. REICHEK
JUSTICE
910354F.P05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
ROYAL MANUFACTURING On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial
COMPANY, INC., Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 90-3209-L.
No. 05-91-00354-CV V. Opinion delivered by Justice
Reichek. Justices Schenck and
BMA ASSOCIATES, INC., Appellee Carlyle participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is
DISMISSED.
Judgment entered May 6, 2021
–3–