Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara

Court of Appeals of Texas

Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara

DecidedJune 4, 2019

Docket01-19-00122-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara (Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara) 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

Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-19-00122-CV Style: Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara Date motion filed*: May 24, 2019 Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief Party filing motion: Appellants Manish Sohani and Anis Virani Document to be filed: Appellants’ Brief

If motion to extend time: Original due date: N/A Number of extensions granted: 0 Current Due Date: N/A Date Requested: July 23, 2019 (60 days from May 24, 2019)

Ordered that motion is:  Granted in part  Denied (without prejudice)  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)  Other: _____________________________________ Although the clerk’s record was filed on April 24, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants’ counsel on April 2, 2019, that the reporter’s record had not been filed due to a lack of appellants’ request or payment, and requested that appellants provide evidence of payment for that record by May 2, 2019, or else this Court may require filing the brief without that record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). Accordingly, appellants’ extension request is denied without prejudice to refiling after the appellants file evidence of payment for the reporter’s record or a notice that they are not requesting that record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a)(2). Appellants’ response shall be due within 5 days of the date of this Order.

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Evelyn V. Keyes________ x Acting individually Acting for the Court Date: _June 4, 2019_____

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

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-19-00122-CV Style: Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara Date motion filed*: May 24, 2019 Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief Party filing motion: Appellants Manish Sohani and Anis Virani Document to be filed: Appellants’ Brief

If motion to extend time: Original due date: N/A Number of extensions granted: 0 Current Due Date: N/A Date Requested: July 23, 2019 (60 days from May 24, 2019)

Ordered that motion is:  Granted in part  Denied (without prejudice)  Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)  Other: _____________________________________ Although the clerk’s record was filed on April 24, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants’ counsel on April 2, 2019, that the reporter’s record had not been filed due to a lack of appellants’ request or payment, and requested that appellants provide evidence of payment for that record by May 2, 2019, or else this Court may require filing the brief without that record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). Accordingly, appellants’ extension request is denied without prejudice to refiling after the appellants file evidence of payment for the reporter’s record or a notice that they are not requesting that record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a)(2). Appellants’ response shall be due within 5 days of the date of this Order.

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Evelyn V. Keyes________ x Acting individually Acting for the Court Date: _June 4, 2019_____

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Manish Sohani and Anis Virani v. Nisar Sunesara, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manish-sohani-and-anis-virani-v-nisar-sunesara-texapp-2019.