Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2002

Longhorn Paving v. Upper Valley Materials, Inc.

Longhorn Paving v. Upper Valley Materials, Inc.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided October 24, 2002

Longhorn Paving v. Upper Valley Materials, Inc.

Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                   NUMBER 13-02-455-CV

 

                             COURT OF APPEALS

 

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                                CORPUS CHRISTI

___________________________________________________________________

 

LONGHORN PAVING,                                                            Appellant,

 

                                                   v.

 

UPPER VALLEY MATERIALS, INC.,                                          Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

 

                        On appeal from the 139th District Court

                                  of Hidalgo County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

 

                                   O P I N I O N

 

         Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa, and Yanez

                                       Opinion Per Curiam

 


Appellant, LONGHORN PAVING, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 139th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-4609-98-C.  Judgment in this cause was signed on April 10, 2002.  A timely motion for new trial was filed on May 10, 2002.  Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant=s notice of appeal was due on July 9, 2002, but was not filed until July 31, 2002. 

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.  To date, no response has been received from appellant.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant=s failure to respond to this Court=s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

 

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 24th day of October, 2002.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.