All Things Texas Workers' Compensation

Facebook Linkedin

Title: 

Hart v. Texas Workers’ Comp Ins. Fund

Date: 

May 2, 2002

Citation: 

14-02-00007-CV

Court: 

  • 14th COA – Houston

Status: 

Unpublished Opinion

No History

Table of Contents

  • Hart v. Texas Workers' Comp Ins. Fund

Court of Appeals of Texas,

Houston (14th Dist.).

Anita Y. HART, Appellant,

v.

TEXAS WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND n/k/a Texas Mutual Ins. Co.; Russell R. Oliver, Individually and in his corporate capacity as President and Ceo; Ron O. Wright, Individually and in his corporate capacity as Chief Operating Officer; Leslie “Tami” Barron, Individually and in her corporate capacity as VP of Human Resources; Kelly Morgan, Individually and in her official capacity as Manager, Case Management; Christopher Vereecke, Individually and in his official capacity as Team Leader, Case Management, Appellees.

No. 14-02-00007-CV.

|

May 2, 2002.

Panel consists of Chief Justice BRISTER and Justices ANDERSON and FROST.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

*1 This is an appeal from an order granting appellees’ motion for summary judgment, signed December 4, 2001. The clerk’s record was filed on February 4, 2002. Appellant’s brief was due on March 6, 2002. No brief or motion for extension of time was filed.

On March 28, 2002, this Court ordered appellant to submit her brief, together with a motion reasonably explaining why the brief was late, on or before April 19, 2002. The order warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex.R.App. P. 42.3(b). Appellant failed to file the brief, the motion, or seek any further extension within the time ordered by the Court.

On April 29, 2002, the Court received by mail five copies of appellant’s brief, together with a motion for extension of time to file the brief.1 Appellant’s cover letter and the certificates of service on her motion and brief certify that the documents were mailed on April 19, 2002. The United States Postal Service postmark on the box in which the briefs were mailed shows the items were mailed on April 26, 2002. Accordingly, the briefs and motion were not timely mailed, despite appellant’s certificate of service to the contrary. See Tex.R.App. P. 9.2(b), 9.5. We deny appellant’s motion for extension of time to file her brief.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

Footnotes

1

The original, signed brief was not received until April 30, 2002. See Tex.R.App. P. 9.1(b), 9.3(a)(C).