Samuel E. Benson, III v. Fiesta Nissan Inc.
This text of Samuel E. Benson, III v. Fiesta Nissan Inc. (Samuel E. Benson, III v. Fiesta Nissan Inc.) 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
NUMBER 13-20-00516-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
SAMUEL E. BENSON, III, Appellant,
v.
FIESTA NISSAN INC., Appellee. ____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Longoria, Hinojosa, and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa
This cause is before the Court on its own motion. On December 23, 2020, the clerk
of the court notified appellant that the appeal has not been timely perfected, 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 the Court’s letter, the appeal would be dismissed. In response, on December 28, 2020, appellant filed a letter agreeing
the notice of appeal exceeded the time limit for a timely appeal and explained he waited
to exhaust all options with the lower court prior to pursing an appeal.
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal
was due on November 24, 2020, but was not filed until November 30, 2020. Texas Rule
of Appellate Procedure 26.1 establishes the deadline for filing a notice of appeal based
on the date that the judgment was signed and not from the dates related to other actions
at the trial court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a).
The Court, having examined and fully considered appellee’s response, the
documents on file, and appellant’s failure to timely perfect this appeal and failure to timely
file a motion for extension, is of the opinion the appeal should be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice
Delivered and filed on the 1st day of July, 2021.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Samuel E. Benson, III v. Fiesta Nissan Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-e-benson-iii-v-fiesta-nissan-inc-texapp-2021.