Narrative Opinion Summary
In the appellate case between the San Antonio Housing Authority (Appellant) and Serento Apartments (Appellee), the Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, addressed procedural issues concerning the filing deadlines for the Appellee's brief. Originating from the 45th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, the Appellee's brief was due on April 6, 2015. Following a lack of submission, the court issued a notice indicating that the appeal would proceed without the Appellee's brief unless a response was filed within ten days. Subsequently, on April 23, 2015, the Appellee requested a ten-day extension, though the specific start date was ambiguous. The court interpreted this request as seeking an extension from the filing date of the motion, thereby granting it and requiring the brief by May 4, 2015. This decision was formalized with the issuance of an order by Justice Marialyn Barnard and sealed by Clerk of Court Keith E. Hottle on April 29, 2015. The court's ruling underscores the importance of adherence to procedural deadlines in appellate proceedings and the court's discretion in interpreting extension requests.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences of Failure to File Briefs in Appellate Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court warned the Appellee that failure to file their brief within the designated time would result in the appeal proceeding without their input.
Reasoning: After no brief was filed, the court notified the Appellee that failure to respond within ten days would result in the appeal being set at issue without their brief.
Filing Deadlines and Extensions in Appellate Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court addressed the issue of filing deadlines for appellate briefs, granting an extension based on the motion date when the start date was unclear.
Reasoning: On April 23, 2015, the Appellee filed a motion requesting a ten-day extension to submit their brief, but the start date for this extension was unclear. The court interpreted the request as seeking ten days from the date of the motion, thus granting the extension.