Betty Ann Newby v. Daniel Moser, Sheria Evans, Moser Investments, the Estate of...
Betty Ann Newby v. Daniel Moser, Sheria Evans, Moser Investments, the Estate of...
Opinion
Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
On March 15, 2004, Betty Ann Newby (Newby) presented a Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Rehearing and a Motion for Rehearing to the clerk for filing. Neither motion set out an appellate cause number in which the documents were to be filed.
By letter dated March 29, 2004, the clerk advised Newby that the motions had not been filed with the papers of any appeal because the motions lacked designation of the appeals in which they were to be filed. The clerk's letter also advised Newby that the court had directed the motions to be redrawn; that the redrawn motions were to designate an appellate cause number in which the motions were to be filed; and that failure to file redrawn motions on or before April 8, 2004, would result in the motions being stricken.
No redrawn motions have been filed. The motions are stricken.
The clerk is directed to file a copy of this order in each appellate cause now pending or which has been pending in this court during calendar year 2004 and in which Newby is or has been a named party.
Per Curiam.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.