Court Opinion

ID: 2921821
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 02:26:54.656059+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:24.500611
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-04-139-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
___________________________________________________________________

CORREO, INC.,                                                                 Appellant,

v.

CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE, 
INC., D/B/A COPELAND CAPITAL,
INC., ASSIGNEE OF VALLEY
COPIER SYSTEMS, INC., D/B/A
VOS/TEXAS FINANCIAL SERVICES,                                  Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza
Opinion Per Curiam

         Appellant, CORREO, INC., attempted to perfect a restricted appeal from a
judgment entered by the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause
number C-1179-03-I.  Judgment in this cause was signed on September 9, 2003. 
Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c), appellant’s notice of appeal was due on March
9, 2004, but was not filed until March 17, 2004.  
         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.  On March 17, 2004, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file
its notice of appeal.  Appellee’s opposition to appellant’s motion was received and filed
in this Court on March 23, 2004. 
         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file,
appellant’s failure to timely perfect its appeal, appellant’s motion for extension of time
to file notice of appeal, and appellee’s opposition thereto, is of the opinion that the
appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Appellant’s motion for extension
of time to file notice of appeal is DENIED.  The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR
WANT OF JURISDICTION.
                                                               PER CURIAM

Memorandum opinion delivered and
filed this the 29th day of April, 2004.