Armand Biglari and Biglari & Associates v. Hugh D. Reed d/b/a Reyata Enterprises and 71 Properties, L.L.C.--Appeal from 33rd District Court of Burnet County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-05-0062-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL D MARCH 31, 2005 ______________________________ ARMAND BIGLARI AND BIGLARI & ASSOCIATES, APPELLANTS V. HUGH D. REED DBA REYATA ENTERPRISES, APPELLEE _________________________________ FROM THE 33RD DISTRICT COURT OF BURNET COUNTY; NO. 22983; HONORABLE GUILFORD L. JONES, III, JUDGE _______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ. MEMORANDUM OPINION Armand Biglari filed a notice of appeal, on his behalf and that of Biglari & Associates, from a judgment in favor of appellee Hugh D. Reed dba Reyata Enterprises. The appellate record was complete on filing of the reporter s record January 20, 2005. See TEX . R. APP . P. 34.1. By letters dated March 3 and March 16, 2005, the clerk of this court notified Biglari that appellants brief was due February 22, 2005, but had yet to be filed. See TEX . R. APP . P. 38.6(a), 38.8. The letters further advised Biglari that the appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution if the brief, or a response reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief with a showing that appellee had not been injured by the delay, was not filed by March 28, 2005. No brief, motion for extension or other response has been received. Accordingly, we now dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and failure to comply with a directive of the court. See TEX . R. APP . P. 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b), (c). James T. Campbell Justice -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
