Charlotte Parkhurst v. Kimble Electric Co. & EMC Insurance Co.
This text of Charlotte Parkhurst v. Kimble Electric Co. & EMC Insurance Co. (Charlotte Parkhurst v. Kimble Electric Co. & EMC Insurance Co.) 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.
Opinion
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Alma L. López, Justice
Catherine Stone, Justice
Paul W. Green, Justice
Delivered and Filed: June 28, 2000
APPEAL DISMISSED
On June 12, 2000, the appellant, Charlotte Parkhurst, filed a motion asking to withdraw her notice of appeal. Therein, Parkhurst provided two reasons for withdrawing her notice: (1) that the court reporter did not accurately record the trial proceedings, and (2) that the trial judge denied her request to review a deposition taken on December 9, 1999. Despite these complaints, the court reporter certified in the reporter's record that the document constituted a true and correct transcription of the trial proceedings. Parkhurst failed to complain about inaccuracies in the reporter's record. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.6(e). Further the appellate record does not reflect that the trial judge denied a request to review a deposition. Parkhurst's motion is granted and this appeal is dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a).
DO NOT PUBLISH
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Charlotte Parkhurst v. Kimble Electric Co. & EMC Insurance Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charlotte-parkhurst-v-kimble-electric-co-emc-insur-texapp-2000.