Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. H. B. Zachry Company, Inc.
This text of Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. H. B. Zachry Company, Inc. (Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. H. B. Zachry Company, 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-01-289-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
________________________________________________________________
FLUOR DANIEL, INC. , Appellant,
v.
H. B. ZACHRY COMPANY, INC. , Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 94th District Court
of Nueces County, Texas
________________________________________________________________
O P I N I O N
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Yanez
Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, FLUOR DANIEL, INC. , attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 97-3543-C . Judgment in this cause was signed on January 2, 2001 . A timely motion for new trial was filed on January 25, 2001. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant's notice of appeal was due on April 2, 2001 , but was not filed until April 27, 2001 . An untimely motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal was filed by appellant on April 27, 2001. Appellant's motion for leave to file motion to extend time to file notice of appeal was filed on May 2, 2001, and appellee's opposition to appellant's motion to extend time to file notice of appeal was field on May 2, 2001.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to timely perfect its appeal, is of the opinion that appellant's motion should be denied and the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant's motion to extend time to file notice of appeal and motion for leave to file motion to extend time to file notice of appeal are denied. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.
Opinion delivered and filed this
the 24th day of May, 2001 .
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. H. B. Zachry Company, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fluor-daniel-inc-v-h-b-zachry-company-inc-texapp-2001.