Correo, Inc. v. Citicorp Vendor Finance, Inc., D/B/A Copeland Capital, Inc., Assignee of Valley Copier Systems, Inc., D/B/A vos/texas Financial Services






NUMBER 13-04-139-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________


CORREO, INC.,                                                                 Appellant,


v.


CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE,

INC., D/B/A COPELAND CAPITAL,

INC., ASSIGNEE OF VALLEY

COPIER SYSTEMS, INC., D/B/A

VOS/TEXAS FINANCIAL SERVICES,                                  Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, CORREO, INC., attempted to perfect a restricted appeal from a judgment entered by the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-1179-03-I. Judgment in this cause was signed on September 9, 2003. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c), appellant’s notice of appeal was due on March 9, 2004, but was not filed until March 17, 2004.

         Notice of this defect was given so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would be dismissed. On March 17, 2004, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file its notice of appeal. Appellee’s opposition to appellant’s motion was received and filed in this Court on March 23, 2004.

         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to timely perfect its appeal, appellant’s motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal, and appellee’s opposition thereto, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal is DENIED. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                               PER CURIAM



Memorandum opinion delivered and

filed this the 29th day of April, 2004.