Terry J. Cantu, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Petra Edison v. Albert Fleury, M.D.
This text of Terry J. Cantu, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Petra Edison v. Albert Fleury, M.D. (Terry J. Cantu, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Petra Edison v. Albert Fleury, M.D.) 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 13-01-123-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________
TERRY J. CANTU, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
PETRA EDISON, DECEASED , Appellant,
v.
ALBERT FLEURY, M.D., ET AL. , Appellees.
___________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 24th District Court
of Victoria County, Texas
___________________________________________________________________
O P I N I O N
Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo
Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, TERRY J. CANTU, ET AL. , attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas, in cause number 99-4-53,263-AAAA . Judgment in this cause was signed on December 20, 2000 . No timely motion for new trial was filed. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, appellant's notice of appeal was due on January 19, 2001 , but was not filed until January 22, 2001 .
Notice of this defect was given 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 receipt of this Court's letter, the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant's failure to respond to this Court's notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.
Opinion delivered and filed this
the 26th day of July, 2001 .
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Terry J. Cantu, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Petra Edison v. Albert Fleury, M.D., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-j-cantu-individually-and-as-representative-o-texapp-2001.