Choice Asset Management, Inc. v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 6, 2012
Docket07-12-00304-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Choice Asset Management, Inc. v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc. (Choice Asset Management, Inc. v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc.) 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
Choice Asset Management, Inc. v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

NO. 07-12-0304-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

AUGUST 6, 2012 ______________________________

CHOICE ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Appellant V.

CIT TECHNOLOGY FINANCING SERVICES, INC.,

Appellee

______________________________

FROM THE 250th DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY;

NO. D-1-GN-11-000209; HON. J. TIM SULAK, PRESIDING ______________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION ______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. Appellant Choice Asset Management, Inc. perfected this appeal on June 11, 2012. The clerk's record was due on or about July 3, 2012. This appeal was transferred by order of the Texas Supreme Court from the Third Court of Appeals to the Seventh Court of Appeals. On July 16, 2012, this court notified the trial court clerk that the clerk's record was late, and directed the clerk to update this court on the status of the record by July 26, 2012. On July 10, 2012, the district clerk notified the clerk of the Third Court of Appeals that the clerk's record would be submitted within ten days after payment for the record had been made. On July 17, 2012, this court notified counsel for appellant that the clerk's record was due July 3, 2012, that no payment had been received, and unless proof of payment was provided the court by July 27, 2012, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. To date, no response has been received, nor have we received any request to postpone the dismissal date. Consequently, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

Per Curiam

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Choice Asset Management, Inc. v. CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/choice-asset-management-inc-v-cit-technology-financing-services-inc-texapp-2012.