Jose M. Lopez and Blanca Alvarez, Individually and as Next Friends of Vianca Lopez and Kassandra Lopez, Minors, and Eva Alvarez v. Juan Pablo Sandoval ( 2006 )

                             NUMBER 13-03-322-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

JOSE M. LOPEZ AND BLANCA

ALVAREZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND

AS NEXT FRIEND OF VIANCA

LOPEZ AND KASSANDRA LOPEZ,

MINORS, AND EVA ALVAREZ,                                  Appellants,

                                           v.

JUAN PABLO SANDOVAL,                                          Appellee.

                  On appeal from the 103^rd  District Court

                          of Cameron County, Texas.

                Concurring Memorandum Opinion

    Before Justices Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Castillo

                Concurring Memorandum Opinion by Justice Castillo

Respectfully, I concur with the decision to affirm the trial court judgment.  I would hold that appellants did not preserve error as to the disqualification issue because they did not timely secure a ruling on their motion to disqualify. Respectfully, I would honor the basic tenet that requires a party to timely secure a ruling on its motion.  See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(2)(A), (B).  In this case, the trial court took the matter under advisement at critical junctures in the trial without ruling on the question before it.  Appellants did not object to the trial court's implied refusal to rule.  The trial court's ruling after the jury returned a verdict on damages is not timely. Id.  Further, even assuming that appellants preserved error, they have not shown that the complained-of error probably caused the rendition of an improper judgment.  See Tex. R. App. P. 44.1(a)(1).                                                                                         

ERRLINDA CASTILLO

Justice

Concurring Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 23rd day of February, 2006.