Roger K. Parsons, Individually and as Independent Administrator for the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons v. Michael Kevin Queenan and the Queenan Law Firm ( 2015 )
Menu:
-
ACCEPTED 05-15-01375-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12/3/2015 3:38:18 PM LISA MATZ CLERK Court of Appeals No. 05-15-01375-CV Trial Court Case No. DC-15-00971 FILED IN Roger K. Parsons, individually, and as § 5th COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS Independent Administrator for the estate § 12/3/2015 3:38:18 PM of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons, § LISA MATZ Appellant § FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS Clerk v. § Michael Kevin Queenan § and the Queenan Law Firm § Appellees § AT DALLAS Appellant’s Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal In response to a 12/2/2015 letter from Clerk-of-the-Court Lisa Matz (Ex. 1), Appellant respectfully moves for more time to file notice of appeal regarding Court of Appeals No. 05-15-01375-CV (Trial Court Case No. DC-15-00971), originating from the 160th District Court in Dallas County, Texas, Judge Jim Jordan presiding. The Clerk’s 12/2/15 review of submitted documents states information sufficient to satisfy all but one element of Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b). To quote, this appeal concerns an order signed by the trial court on July 28, 2015 granting summary judgment with regard to all claims in the case. Further, Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial. Accordingly, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on October 26, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). The clerk’s record shows, however, that the notice of appeal was not filed until November 10, 2015. Finally, Because the notice … was filed within fifteen days of the deadline, appellant can remedy the timeliness problem by filing, within ten days of the date of this letter, a motion for extension that complies with rule 10.5(b). Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal in Parsons v. Queenan p. 1 of 2 To address Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), which requires “the facts relied on to reasonably explain the need for an extension,” Appellant’s counsel admits to miscalculating the applicable deadline. Further, counsel avers the miscalculation was not the result of conscious indifference---it was a mistake for which counsel apologizes to Clerk, Court, Appellees and opposing counsel. Finally, counsel avers that there was no intent on the part of Appellant or counsel to delay the determination of this matter. Appellant prays that this motion be granted and that the above-styled appeal be addressed by the Court. Respectfully submitted, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on 12/3/15, I served the foregoing on opposing counsel: Marshall M. Searcy, Jr. and Caleb B. Bulls 201 Main Street, Suite 2500, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 caleb.bulls@kellyhart.com; marshall.searcy@kellyhart.com Motion to Extend Time to File Notice of Appeal in Parsons v. Queenan p. 2 of 2 CHIEF JUSTICE LISA MATZ CAROLYN WRIGHT Exhibit 1 CLERK OF THE COURT (214) 712-3450 JUSTICES theclerk@5th.txcourts.gov DAVID L. BRIDGES MOLLY FRANCIS GAYLE HUMPA DOUGLAS S. LANG BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS (214) 712-3434 Court of Appeals ROBERT M. FILLMORE gayle.humpa@5th.txcourts.gov LANA MYERS DAVID EVANS DAVID LEWIS Fifth District of Texas at Dallas FACSIMILE (214) 745-1083 ADA BROWN 600 COMMERCE STREET, SUITE 200 CRAIG STODDART INTERNET BILL WHITEHILL DALLAS, TEXAS 75202 WWW.TXCOURTS.GOV/5THCOA.ASPX DAVID J. SCHENCK (214) 712-3400 December 2, 2015 Mr. Christopher Nygaard Nygaard Law Chicago Title Building 1400 Preston Rd., Suite 400 Plano, TX 75093 RE: Court of Appeals Number: 05-15-01375-CV Trial Court Case Number: DC-15-00971 Style: Roger K. Parsons, Individually and as Independent Administrator for the Estate of Esther Ann Kartsotis Parsons v. Michael Kevin Queenan and the Queenan Law Firm Dear Mr. Nygaard: The Court has reviewed the clerk’s record in this case. The appeal concerns an order signed by the trial court on July 28, 2015 granting summary judgment with regard to all claims in the case. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial. Accordingly, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on October 26, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). The clerk’s record shows, however, that the notice of appeal was not filed until November 10, 2015. Without a timely filed notice of appeal, the Court lacks jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1 The Court may, however, grant an appellant an extension of time to file a notice of appeal if the appellant filed the notice of appeal within fifteen days of the deadline and files a motion complying with rule 10.5(b) of the rules of appellate procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Because the notice of appeal was filed within fifteen days of the deadline, appellant can remedy the timeliness problem by filing, within ten days of the date of this letter, a motion for extension that complies with rule 10.5(b). Exhibit 1 We caution you that failure to file a proper extension motion by the deadline set forth in this letter may result in the dismissal of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Respectfully, /s/ Lisa Matz, Clerk of the Court cc: Mr. Marshall M. Searcy Jr. Kelly, Hart & Hallman LLP 201 Main Street, Suite 2500 Fort Worth, TX 76102-3129 2
Document Info
Docket Number: 05-15-01375-CV
Filed Date: 12/3/2015
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 9/29/2016