Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr.

DecidedJune 28, 2007

Docket13-07-00295-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr. (Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr., (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-07-295-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

ACCUTEST SERVICES, INC., Appellant,

v.

JOHN BERT DAHL, ET AL., Appellees.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ACCUTEST SERVICES, INC., attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 06-2768-B. Judgment in this cause was signed on March 9, 2007. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant's notice of appeal was due on April 9, 2007, but was not filed until May 10, 2007.

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 its 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

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 28th day of June, 2007.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

NUMBER 13-07-295-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

ACCUTEST SERVICES, INC., Appellant,

v.

JOHN BERT DAHL, ET AL., Appellees.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ACCUTEST SERVICES, INC., attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 06-2768-B. Judgment in this cause was signed on March 9, 2007. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant's notice of appeal was due on April 9, 2007, but was not filed until May 10, 2007.

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 its 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

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 28th day of June, 2007.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Accutest Services, Inc. v. John Bert Dahl and John L. Bedford, Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/accutest-services-inc-v-john-bert-dahl-and-john-l--texapp-2007.