Milton B. Russell v. CPS Energy

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 19, 2014
Docket04-14-00415-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Milton B. Russell v. CPS Energy (Milton B. Russell v. CPS Energy) 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
Milton B. Russell v. CPS Energy, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

City of San Antonio, Through its Agent, City Public Service Board of San Antonio d/b/a

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas June 19, 2014

No. 04-14-00415-CV

Milton B. RUSSELL, Appellant

v.

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Through its Agent, City Public Service Board of San Antonio d/b/a CPS Energy, Appellee

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012-CI-16913 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

ORDER The trial court signed a final order on April 24, 2014. Appellant did not file any post- judgment motions. See, e.g., TEX. R. CIV. P. 296, 329b(a), (g). Appellant’s notice of appeal was due on May 27, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). If accompanied by a motion for extension of time that complied with Rule 10.5(b), the notice of appeal was due not later than June 9, 2014. See id. R. 26.3. The electronic filing date- time stamps show Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was filed on June 10, 2014, and the notice of appeal was filed on June 11, 2014. See generally Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (“[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 period in which the appellant would be entitled to move to extend the filing deadline under Rule [26.3].” (emphasis added)). Therefore, we ORDER Appellant to SHOW CAUSE in writing within TEN DAYS of the date of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617 (“[O]nce the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.”). If Appellant fails to respond within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending further order of this court.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 19th day of June, 2014.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court

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

Related

Verburgt v. Dorner
959 S.W.2d 615 (Texas Supreme Court, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Milton B. Russell v. CPS Energy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milton-b-russell-v-cps-energy-texapp-2014.