Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas

DecidedSeptember 14, 2010

Docket03-09-00675-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas (Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas) 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

Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00675-CV

Jane Matyastik, Appellant

v.

The City of Cameron, Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 30,923, HONORABLE ED MAGRE, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Jane Matyastik filed her notice of appeal on November 30, 2009. Matyastik also filed a motion for extension of time to file her brief on May 17, 2010. This Court granted her request on May 21, 2010. On June 29, 2010, Matyastik filed a second motion for extension of time to file her brief, which this Court granted on the following day. When granting her request, this Court specified that her brief was due on July 16, 2010. Matyastik did not file her brief by the deadline specified, and on July 29, 2010, this Court sent her a notice that her brief was overdue and warned her that her appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution if "this Court does not receive a satisfactory response to this notice on or before August 09, 2010." To date, Matyastik has not filed a response to our late-brief notice or an appellant's brief. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: September 14, 2010

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

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00675-CV

Jane Matyastik, Appellant

v.

The City of Cameron, Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 30,923, HONORABLE ED MAGRE, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Jane Matyastik filed her notice of appeal on November 30, 2009. Matyastik also filed a motion for extension of time to file her brief on May 17, 2010. This Court granted her request on May 21, 2010. On June 29, 2010, Matyastik filed a second motion for extension of time to file her brief, which this Court granted on the following day. When granting her request, this Court specified that her brief was due on July 16, 2010. Matyastik did not file her brief by the deadline specified, and on July 29, 2010, this Court sent her a notice that her brief was overdue and warned her that her appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution if "this Court does not receive a satisfactory response to this notice on or before August 09, 2010." To date, Matyastik has not filed a response to our late-brief notice or an appellant's brief. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: September 14, 2010

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jane Matyastik v. the City of Cameron, Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jane-matyastik-v-the-city-of-cameron-texas-texapp-2010.