George Quisenberry and Betty Quisenberry v. Tommy English and Wife, Jana English, Individally and D/B/A JC Trucking
This text of George Quisenberry and Betty Quisenberry v. Tommy English and Wife, Jana English, Individally and D/B/A JC Trucking (George Quisenberry and Betty Quisenberry v. Tommy English and Wife, Jana English, Individally and D/B/A JC Trucking) 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
NO. 07-01-0179-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL A
NOVEMBER 26, 2001
______________________________
GEORGE QUISENBERRY AND BETTY QUISENBERRY, APPELLANTS
V.
TOMMY ENGLISH AND WIFE, JANA ENGLISH, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A JC TRUCKING, APPELLEES
_________________________________
FROM THE 110TH DISTRICT COURT OF FLOYD COUNTY;
NO. 9307; HONORABLE JOHN R. HOLLUMS, JUDGE
_______________________________
Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.
Appellants George Quisenberry and Betty Quisenberry appeal from a default
judgment entered against them in an action by appellees Tommy English and wife, Jana
English, individually and d/b/a JC Trucking, to recover sums of money allegedly owed by
appellants. For the reasons expressed, we dismiss the appeal. The clerk’s record was filed on May 24, 2001. However, no reporter’s record has
been filed because it has not been designated by appellants. We notified appellants by
letter dated June 14, 2001, that if we did not receive the reporter’s record within 30 days,
we would proceed to consider and decide those issues or points that did not require a
reporter’s record for decision. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3 (c). We next notified appellants by
letter dated October 25, 2001, that they had not filed a brief or a motion for extension of
time to file one, and that unless a response reasonably explaining that failure, together
with a showing that appellees have not been significantly injured due to such failure was
received by November 6, 2001, we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Tex.
R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). No such response has been received.
Accordingly, the appeal must be and hereby is dismissed.
John T. Boyd Chief Justice
Do not publish.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
George Quisenberry and Betty Quisenberry v. Tommy English and Wife, Jana English, Individally and D/B/A JC Trucking, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-quisenberry-and-betty-quisenberry-v-tommy-e-texapp-2001.