Narrative Opinion Summary
In the appellate case involving Maria Resendiz and Sellers Bros. Inc., the Appellant, Resendiz, has submitted her first motion to extend the deadline for filing her appellant's brief. Originally due on July 9, 2015, Resendiz seeks a 46-day extension, moving the deadline to August 24, 2015. The extension request is unopposed, evidenced by the Certificate of Conference, indicating the Appellee's counsel has no objections. The motion underscores the necessity for additional preparation time to ensure a comprehensive brief for the court's consideration. The assertion of facts in the motion is based on the personal knowledge of Resendiz's counsel, which circumvents the need for verification as per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.2. The motion concludes with a request for the court to grant the extension and any additional relief deemed appropriate. The procedural compliance is further substantiated by the Certificate of Service, confirming all relevant parties have been duly notified of the motion. The pending decision from the court will determine the granted extension and any further relief related to the motion.
Legal Issues Addressed
Extension of Time for Filing Appellant's Briefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Appellant's request for a 46-day extension to file her brief is unopposed and grounded in the need for adequate preparation time.
Reasoning: Maria Resendiz, the Appellant, has filed a First Unopposed Motion to Extend Time for submitting her Appellant's Brief in the case against Sellers Bros. Inc., the Appellee.
Unopposed Motion and Certificate of Conferencesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The motion to extend time is unopposed, as indicated by the Certificate of Conference, ensuring smooth procedural progression without disputes.
Reasoning: The motion is supported by the fact that opposing counsel has indicated no objection to the extension.
Verification Requirements under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.2subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The factual assertions in the motion, based on personal knowledge, eliminate the necessity for additional verification.
Reasoning: All factual assertions in the motion are based on the personal knowledge of the signing counsel, negating the need for verification under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.2.