Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver

Court of Appeals of Texas

Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver

DecidedFebruary 22, 2008

Docket12-07-00479-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver (Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver) 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

Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

NO. 12-07-00479-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

KITTISIA BROWN PARMER, § APPEAL FROM THE

APPELLANT

V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 2 OF

EDUARDO MALECIO DEJULIAN

AND MONICA OLIVER, § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

APPELLEES

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). The judgment in the instant case was signed on November 20, 2007. Thereafter, on December 19, 2007, Appellant filed a notice of appeal that failed to contain the information required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e), i.e., a certificate of service showing service on all parties to the trial court's judgment.

On January 18, 2008, Appellant was notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.1 that the notice of appeal was defective for failure to comply with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e). She was further notified that unless she filed an amended notice of appeal on or before February 18, 2008, the appeal would be referred to the court for dismissal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. The deadline for filing an amended notice of appeal has passed, and Appellant failed to respond to our notice or correct her defective notice of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c); Feist v. Berg, No. 12-04-00004-CV, 2004 WL 252785, at *1 (Tex. App.-Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied); Feist v. Hubert, No. 12-03-00442-CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Tex.

App.–Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied).

SAM GRIFFITH

Justice

Opinion delivered February 22, 2008.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)

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

NO. 12-07-00479-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

KITTISIA BROWN PARMER, § APPEAL FROM THE

APPELLANT

V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 2 OF

EDUARDO MALECIO DEJULIAN

AND MONICA OLIVER, § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

APPELLEES

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). The judgment in the instant case was signed on November 20, 2007. Thereafter, on December 19, 2007, Appellant filed a notice of appeal that failed to contain the information required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e), i.e., a certificate of service showing service on all parties to the trial court's judgment.

On January 18, 2008, Appellant was notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.1 that the notice of appeal was defective for failure to comply with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e). She was further notified that unless she filed an amended notice of appeal on or before February 18, 2008, the appeal would be referred to the court for dismissal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. The deadline for filing an amended notice of appeal has passed, and Appellant failed to respond to our notice or correct her defective notice of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c); Feist v. Berg, No. 12-04-00004-CV, 2004 WL 252785, at *1 (Tex. App.-Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied); Feist v. Hubert, No. 12-03-00442-CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Tex.

App.–Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied).

SAM GRIFFITH

Justice

Opinion delivered February 22, 2008.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kittisia Brown Parmer v. Eduardo Malecio Dejulian and Monica Oliver, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kittisia-brown-parmer-v-eduardo-malecio-dejulian-a-texapp-2008.