Annye Quesnel v. Les Administrations Viviani-Noviello, Inc. Appeal from 236th District Court of Tarrant County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-17-00008-CV ANNYE QUESNEL APPELLANT V. LES ADMINISTRATIONS VIVIANINOVIELLO, INC. APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 236TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 236-281756-15 ------------ MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT -----------Appellant’s brief was originally due on April 27, 2017. On April 26, 2017, this court granted appellant’s first motion for an extension of time to file her brief and ordered the brief due on May 30, 2017. On May 25, 2017, this court allowed appellant’s counsel to withdraw, granted appellant’s second requested extension, and ordered her brief due June 29, 2017. On July 19, 2017, this court granted 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. appellant’s “First Amended Third Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief,” directed that her brief should be filed no later than August 3, 2017, and stated, “NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED.” That order included the following warning: Appellant is cautioned that the court takes seriously the obligation of pro se parties to familiarize themselves and fully comply with our procedural rules, just as licensed attorneys must, and that in certain situations, noncompliance can ultimately result in motions being denied or appeals dismissed. On August 23, 2017, we notified appellant that her brief had not been filed as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). We stated that we could dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant filed her brief with the court on or before September 5, 2017. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). We have not received appellant’s brief or any response from appellant. Because appellant has failed to file a brief that was originally due more than five months ago despite numerous extensions and has not provided a reasonable explanation for her failure, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), 43.2(f). Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. PER CURIAM PANEL: PITTMAN, WALKER, and MEIER, JJ. DELIVERED: October 5, 2017 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.
