Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell

DecidedMarch 9, 2006

Docket13-05-00645-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell (Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell) 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

Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-05-645-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

ASHLEY DANIELLE JAMES, Appellant,

v.

RAYFORD B. MITCHELL, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 319th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ASHLEY DANIELLE JAMES, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 04-4557-G. Judgment in this cause was signed on April 29, 2005. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant=s notice of appeal was due on May 30, 2005, but was not filed until September 21, 2005.

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 this Court=s order, 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 her 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 9th day of March, 2006.

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

NUMBER 13-05-645-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

ASHLEY DANIELLE JAMES, Appellant,

v.

RAYFORD B. MITCHELL, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 319th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ASHLEY DANIELLE JAMES, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 04-4557-G. Judgment in this cause was signed on April 29, 2005. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant=s notice of appeal was due on May 30, 2005, but was not filed until September 21, 2005.

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 this Court=s order, 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 her 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 9th day of March, 2006.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ashley Danielle James v. Rayford B. Mitchell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ashley-danielle-james-v-rayford-b-mitchell-texapp-2006.