James Clinton Coyle v. Coyle Family Farm, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 6, 2016
Docket04-16-00133-CV
StatusPublished

This text of James Clinton Coyle v. Coyle Family Farm, Inc. (James Clinton Coyle v. Coyle Family Farm, 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
James Clinton Coyle v. Coyle Family Farm, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

ACCEPTED 04-16-00133-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 6/6/2016 3:51:47 PM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS JAMES CLINTON COYLE, § 06/6/2016 3:51:47 PM Appellant, § KEITH E. HOTTLE § Clerk VS. § NO. 04-16-00133-CV § COYLE FAMILY FARM, INC., § Appellee. §

ON APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. 3208 COUNTY COURT AT LAW, MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS HONORABLE VIVIAN TORRES, JUDGE PRESIDING

APPELLANT’S FIRST UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS:

Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1 and 38.6(d), the Appellant, James Clinton

Coyle (“Appellant”) files this Unopposed First Motion for Extension of Time to File

Appellant’s Brief.

Appellant’s brief is currently due on June 9, 2016.

Counsel for Appellant requests a 60-day extension of time to file the opening

brief.

Counsel for Appellant relies on the following reasons, in addition to the routine matters that counsel must attend to in daily practice, to explain the need for

the requested extension:

 Counsel for Appellant has a pre-planned vacation scheduled for the month

of June.

Counsel for Appellant seeks this extension of time to be able to prepare an

effective and concise brief to aid this Court in its analysis of the issues presented.

This request is not sought for delay but so that justice may be done.

The undersigned counsel has conferred with opposing counsel and he has

indicated that his client does not oppose this motion.

All facts recited in this motion are within the personal knowledge of the

counsel signing this motion, therefore no verification is necessary under Texas Rule

of Appellate Procedure 10.2.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the reasons set forth above, Appellant requests that this Court grant this

Unopposed First Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief. Appellant

requests all other relief to which he may be entitled. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Anton E. Hackebeil ANTON E. HACKEBEIL State Bar No. 08667150 P.O. Box 220 Hondo, Texas 78861 Tel: (830) 741-7001 Fax: (866) 743-4537 Email: tonyhackebeil@att.net ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I certify that on June 6, 2016, I conferred with counsel for Appellee regarding

this motion and Appellee is not opposed to this motion.

/s/ Anton E. Hackebeil Anton E. Hackebeil CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on June 6, 2016, a true and correct copy of Appellant’s

First Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief was served

on counsel for Appellee by the eFileTexas.gov efiling system.

/s/ Anton E. Hackebeil Anton E. Hackebeil

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I certify that this document complies with the typeface requirements of Tex.

R. App. P. 9.4(e) because it has been prepared in a conventional typeface no smaller

than 14-point font for text. I also certify that this document contains 245 words,

excluding any parts exempted by Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(1).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
James Clinton Coyle v. Coyle Family Farm, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-clinton-coyle-v-coyle-family-farm-inc-texapp-2016.