## NO. 12

- 23

- 00324

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

CHARLES BREWSTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ATTORNEY

IN

- FACT FOR ARTHUR BREWSTER AND AUSTIN BREWSTER, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF ALMA JEAN BREWSTER, DECEASED , APPELLANT S

V.

DELBERT LYNN GOSS AND ROY LYNN LEMLEY , APPELLEE S §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 4TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

RUSK COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(b). Appellant Charles Brewster, individually and as attorney

- in

- fact for Arthur Brewster and Austin
Brewster, Executor of the Estate of Alma Jean Brewster, deceased, filed h is notice of appeal on December 21, 2023. The reporter’s record was filed on January 22, 2024, and the clerk’s record was filed on January 23. Appellant’s brief was due on or before February 22

. On February 1 4 , Appellant filed a motion for extension o f time to file his brief and sought

an extension of time until March 25 to submit a brief. This Court granted the motion. On March

20 , Appellant filed a second motion for extension of time to file his brief and sought an extension

of time until April 24 to submit a brief. This Court granted th at motion as well. On May 13, this Court notified Appellant that his brief was late and that his appeal may be

dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1)

unless
, no later than Thursday, May 23 , he filed a motion for extension of time, which contain ed2 a reasonable explanation for such failure
, and which showed that Appellee has not suffered material injury thereby . On May 23, Appellant filed his third motion for e xtension of time to file his brief, in which he stated that the parties were engaged in settlement negotiations
, which had, to that point in time, failed to resolve the matter. In his motion, Appellant sought an extension of

time to file his brief until J une 22. This Court granted the motion, but in so doing, further order ed

that “ NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT [and that]

FAILURE TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF BY THE EXTENDED DEADLINE MAY

RESULT IN THIS C A SE BEING REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR DISMISSAL. ”

The June 22 deadline passed, and Appellant has not filed a brief, a motion for leave to file
a late brief, or a motion for extension of time. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(c).

Opinion delivered July 3, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JU LY 3, 2024

NO. 12-23-00324- CV

CHARLES BREWSTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ATTORNEY

- IN

- FACT FOR ARTHUR BREWSTER AND AUSTIN BREWSTER, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF ALMA JEAN BREWSTER, DECEASED , Appellants V. DELBERT LYNN GOSS AND ROY LYNN LEMLEY , Appellee s

Appeal from the 4th District Court

of Rusk County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2023-120)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED , and DECREED by this Court that the appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of prosecution ; and that this decision be certified to

the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.