Dr. Nyla Ptomey v. Texas Tech University

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 8, 2007
Docket07-06-00332-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Dr. Nyla Ptomey v. Texas Tech University (Dr. Nyla Ptomey v. Texas Tech University) 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
Dr. Nyla Ptomey v. Texas Tech University, (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

NO. 07-06-0332-CV


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL D


JUNE 8, 2007

______________________________


DR. NYLA PTOMEY, APPELLANT


V.


TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY, APPELLEE
_________________________________


FROM THE 99TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;


NO. 2003-523,777; HONORABLE WILLIAM C. SOWDER, JUDGE
_______________________________


Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Nyla Ptomey perfected appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Texas Tech University on her claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. The clerk's record was filed October 17, 2006. This Court granted motions to extend the time for filing appellant's brief on November 28, 2006 and January 10, 2007. Appellant's third motion for extension of time became moot on the filing of a twelve-volume supplemental clerk's record on April 2, 2007. We granted appellant's fourth motion for extension of time on May 7, 2007 and her original brief was received May 11, 2007. By letter dated May 16, 2007, we notified appellant her brief did not substantially comply with Rules of Appellate Procedure 9 and 38. Notably, no copy of the brief was signed, or contained a prayer for relief or certificate of service. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.1(a), 9.5(e), 38.1(i). Appellant was directed to file a corrected brief on or before Tuesday, May 29, 2007, and advised the failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal. No brief or other response has been received.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and failure to comply with a directive of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b) & (c).



Per Curiam



Relator has not paid the fee as directed or filed an affidavit of indigence.

          Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 42.3(c).

                                                                Mackey K. Hancock

                                                                        Justice


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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dr. Nyla Ptomey v. Texas Tech University, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dr-nyla-ptomey-v-texas-tech-university-texapp-2007.