ACCEPTED
04-14-00906-cv
FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
3/2/2015 5:21:09 PM
KEITH HOTTLE
CLERK
No. 04-14-00906-CV
FILED IN
IN THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS 4th COURT OF APPEALS
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
at SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 3/2/2015 5:21:09 PM
__________________________________________________________________
KEITH E. HOTTLE
Clerk
DAVID MAUK
Appellant
v.
Appellees
PIPE CREEK WATER WELL, LLC and ROBERT RAE POWELL
__________________________________________________________________
Cause No. 2013-CI-00386; Appeal from the 408th Judicial District Court,
Bexar County, Texas
__________________________________________________________________
APPELLANT, DAVID MAUK’S UNOPPOSED MOTION
TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO APPELLEES’ REPLY BRIEF
__________________________________________________________________
TO THE HONORABLE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS:
NOW COMES, Appellant, DAVID MAUK, and files his Unopposed Motion
to Extend Deadline to Respond to Appellees’ Reply Brief and in support thereof
would respectfully show the following:
1. Appellees’ filed their Reply Brief on February 19, 2015.
2. Appellant’s deadline to reply to Plaintiffs’ Response is twenty-one (21) days
after the Reply Brief is filed, being Thursday, March 12, 2015.
1
Unopposed Motion to Extend time to Respond to Appellee’s Reply Brief 3.2.2015
3. Appellant respectfully requests an extension of time to reply due to the fact
that Appellant’s counsel the lead attorney in this matter, is on vacation from March
9, 2015 through March 13, 2015.
4. Further Appellant’s counsel has a deadline of March 16, 2015 to file a 12b(6)
Motion in response to Plaintiff’s Fist Amended Petition in a federal case styled Civil
No. SA-14-CA-941-OLG, David Neill Jones v. Kerr County, Texas, Kerr County
Sheriff’s Department, Officer Stephen Wherry, Officers John Doe, Kerrville Police
Department, City of Kerrville; in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Texas, San Antonio, Division. Also, Appellant’s counsel has other
matters to conclude before his vacation, which will preclude diligence in researching
and briefing the issues presented herein.
5. Appellant, David Mauk, respectfully requests that the Court grant a seven (7)
day extension for the reasons stated herein extending our deadline to March 19,
2015. This Motion is not sought for delay but in the interest that proper attention
can be given to adequately review Appellees’ Reply Brief and the exhibits tendered
with said Reply and to prepare a Response to Appellees’ Reply Brief.
6. Appellant conferred with Appellees’ counsel, Megan H. Kucera, on March 2,
2015 and counsel is unopposed to this motion as it is not sought for the purpose of
delay, but so that justice may be done.
2
Unopposed Motion to Extend time to Respond to Appellee’s Reply Brief 3.2.2015
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant, David Mauk, hereby
prays that the Court allow additional time and extend the deadline to reply to
Appellees’ Response to Appellant’s Reply Brief.
MCKAMIE KRUEGER, LLP
941 Proton Road
San Antonio, Texas 78258
210.546.2122
210.546.2130
By: /s/ Adolfo Ruiz
Adolfo Ruiz
State Bar No. 17385600
adolfo@mckamiekrueger.com
Barbara L. Quirk
State Bar No. 16436750
barbara@mckamiekrueger.com
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT,
DAVID MAUK
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy of Appellant’s Unopposed Motion to Extend Appellant’s
Deadline to Respond to Appellees’ Reply Brief was served on Appellees through
counsel of record in accordance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure as
indicated below on the March 2, 2015, addressed to:
Keith P. Miller via E-Serve
Megan Kucera
Law Offices of Keith P. Miller, P.C.
14350 Northbrook, Ste. 150
San Antonio, Texas 78232
/s/: Adolfo Ruiz
ADOLFO RUIZ
3
Unopposed Motion to Extend time to Respond to Appellee’s Reply Brief 3.2.2015