John Gunn v. Virginia Gunn--Appeal from 13th District Court of Navarro County

Annotate this Case

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

 

No. 10-97-040-CV

 

JOHN GUNN,

Appellant

v.

 

VIRGINIA GUNN,

Appellee

 

From the 13th District Court

Navarro County, Texas

Trial Court # 96-00-06509-CV

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

John Gunn is attempting to appeal from a final decree of divorce. We will dismiss his appeal because he failed to timely file a statement of facts. //

The final decree of divorce was entered on December 9, 1996, and the appellant timely filed a motion for new trial on December 4, 1996. See Tex. R. App. P. 58; Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(a). Pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 54(a), the record was due to be filed in his court on or before April 8, 1997. // The transcript was filed on February 3, 1997, but we have not received a statement of facts.

On April 17, 1997, we sent notice to the appellant under Rules of Appellate Procedure 54(a) and 60(a)(2) that we might dismiss his appeal unless within ten days he provided us with sufficient grounds to continue it. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a), 60(a)(2). More than ten days have passed, and we have received no correspondence from him.

This court has no authority to consider either an untimely transcript or an untimely statement of facts. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a); see Jarrell v. Serfass, 916 S.W.2d 719, 720 (Tex. App. Waco 1996, no writ); Knight v. Sam Houston Memorial Hosp., 907 S.W.2d 847, 848 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ denied). An untimely-filed statement of facts presents a court of appeals with sufficient grounds to dismiss an appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a). Despite warning from this court, the appellant has nevertheless failed to timely file a statement of facts. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. Id.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Cummings, and

Justice Vance

Dismissed for failure to timely file record

Opinion delivered and filed May 7, 1997

Do not publish

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.