Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

BALTASAR D. CRUZ, Appellant v. JAMES VAN SICKLE, KARL-THOMAS MUSSELMAN, ET AL, Appellees

ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-09275
ORDER

Before the Court is appellant's January 15, 2014 motion to increase the word limit of his reply brief. Appellant seeks to increase the 7,500 word limit allowed for computer-generated reply briefs and the 27,000 word limit allowed for all computer-generated briefs filed by a party by up to 12,500 words. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4(i)(2)(B),(C). We note we previously granted appellant leave to file an initial brief of 19,500 words, 4,500 words more than the rules of appellate procedure allow for an initial brief. See id. 9.4(i)(2)(B). Accordingly, we GRANT appellant's motion to the extent that appellant's reply brief be no more than 9,500 words. We STRIKE appellant's 19,900-word reply brief, filed January 23, 2014 while this motion was pending, and ORDER appellant to file an amended reply brief no later than February 17, 2014.

No extensions will be granted absent exigent circumstances.

ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS


JUSTICE


Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Cruz v. Van Sickle
(Feb 3, 2014)