Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor v. Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. D/B/A Allen Keller Co.
This text of Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor v. Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. D/B/A Allen Keller Co. (Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor v. Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. D/B/A Allen Keller Co.) 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.
Opinion
Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. d/b/a Allen Keller /s
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 20, 2014
No. 04-14-00622-CV
Marisela G. SALAS, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor, Appellants
v.
ALLEN KELLER CO. I, L.L.C. d/b/a Allen Keller Co., Appellee
From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas Trial Court No. 13410 Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding
ORDER In this appeal, appellant appeals a judgment signed June 9, 2014. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was due July 9, 2014, or a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due fifteen days later on July 24, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3. The record contains a notice of appeal file stamped July 11, 2014. The notice of appeal contains a certificate of service stating the notice of appeal was served on appellee by mail on July 9, 2014; however, it does not state it was filed by mail with the district clerk on that same date. Appellant did not file a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal.
A notice of appeal may appear to be late if filed by mail pursuant to rule 9.2(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.2(b); Lofton v. Allstate Ins. Co., 895 S.W.2d 693 (Tex. 1995). Additionally, a motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by rule 26.1, but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 615 (Tex. 1997). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file timely the notice of appeal. See id.; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C); Garcia v. Kastner Farms, Inc., 774 S.W.2d 668, 670 (Tex. 1989).
We therefore order that appellant may file, on or before October 30, 2014, a response establishing that the notice of appeal was timely filed by mail or offering a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal timely. If appellant fails to satisfactorily respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). If a supplemental clerk’s record is required, appellant must ask the district clerk to prepare one and must notify the clerk of this court that such a request was made. All deadlines in this matter are suspended until further order of this court.
___________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 20th day of October, 2014.
___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suares, Minor v. Allen Keller Co. I, L.L.C. D/B/A Allen Keller Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marisela-g-salas-individually-and-as-representative-of-the-estate-of-texapp-2014.