
NO. 07-01-0120-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL A


DECEMBER 11, 2001


______________________________



IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF

SHARON KNIE AND GREGORY ALLEN KNIE



_________________________________


FROM THE 316TH DISTRICT COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;


NO. 32,804; HONORABLE JOHN LAGRONE, JUDGE


_______________________________


Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.
	Appellant Sharon Knie appeals from a dismissal of her bill of review by which she
seeks to modify a divorce decree.   For the reasons we express, we dismiss the appeal.
	The clerk's and reporter's records were filed on June 13, 2001.  That being so,
appellant's brief was due to be filed on July 13, 2001.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a).  By letter
dated November 1, 2001, we informed appellant that we had not received a brief or a
motion for extension of time to file one and that unless a response reasonably explaining
that failure, together with a showing that appellee had not been significantly injured by that
failure was received by November 8, 2001, the appeal would be dismissed for want of
prosecution.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).   We have received no response to that letter.  
	Accordingly, the appeal must be and is hereby dismissed. 
							Per Curiam
Do not publish.   

thFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  







  NO. 07-10-0125-CV
 
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
 
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
AT AMARILLO
 
PANEL D
 
APRIL 12, 2010
 
______________________________
 
 
IN RE ROBERT WAYNE VEIGEL, ET AL.
RELATOR
 
 
_________________________________
 
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
 
_______________________________
 
Before QUINN, C.J.. and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
ORDER ON MOTION TO STAY UNDERLYING PROCEEDINGS
            Relator,
Robert Wayne Veigel, Individually and in his capacity
as Co-Trustee of the Ardella Veigel
Trust No. 2, seeks an emergency stay of trial proceedings set for April 19,
2010, pending a ruling on his contemporaneously filed Petition for Writ of
Mandamus.  For the reasons to be set
forth in our memorandum opinion to follow, Relators
motion is denied.
                                                                                    Per
Curiam

