Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2005

Devorah J. Goldberg v. Pete Garcia, M.D. & Christus Spohn Health System & John Does 1 Thru Xx

Devorah J. Goldberg v. Pete Garcia, M.D. & Christus Spohn Health System & John Does 1 Thru Xx
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided May 5, 2005

Devorah J. Goldberg v. Pete Garcia, M.D. & Christus Spohn Health System & John Does 1 Thru Xx

Opinion






NUMBER 13-04-447-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________


DEVORAH J. GOLDBERG,                                                  Appellant,


v.


PETE GARCIA, M.D., ET AL.,                                             Appellees.

___________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 28th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, DEVORAH J. GOLDBERG, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 28th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 03-7534-A. Judgment in this cause was signed on May 12, 2004. A timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on August 10, 2004, but was not filed until August 26, 2004.

         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. Appellant’s response to this Court’s notice was received on September 29, 2004, and appellees’ response was received on October 7, 2004.

         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s and appellees’ responses 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



Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 5th day of May, 2005.

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