Jeremy Daniel Guzman v. Cassandra Carlan

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 12, 2005
Docket13-05-00251-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Jeremy Daniel Guzman v. Cassandra Carlan (Jeremy Daniel Guzman v. Cassandra Carlan) 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
Jeremy Daniel Guzman v. Cassandra Carlan, (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-05-251-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________


JEREMY DANIEL GUZMAN,                                               Appellant,


v.


CASSANDRA CARLAN,                                                      Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 310th District Court

of Harris County, Texas

___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, JEREMY DANIEL GUZMAN, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 310th District Court of Harris County, Texas, in cause number 2004-19152. Judgment in this cause was signed on November 29, 2004. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on December 29, 2004, but was not filed until February 7, 2005.

         Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant.

         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s failure to respond to this Court’s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                               PER CURIAM



Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 12th day of May, 2005.



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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jeremy Daniel Guzman v. Cassandra Carlan, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeremy-daniel-guzman-v-cassandra-carlan-texapp-2005.