Court Opinion

ID: 2926941
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 22:42:49.897054+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:29.155241
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-00378-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

______________________________________________________________
 
LEONARDO RAMIREZ AND ANITA RAMIREZ, 	Appellants,

v.

PATRICIA RODRIGUEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND 
AS NEXT FRIEND OF ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ, 
JOSE ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ, AND 
MARIA GUADALUPE RODRIGUEZ,	Appellees. 
	____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 
Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

	The appellants' brief in the above cause was due on April 3, 2009.  On April 17,
2009, the Clerk of the Court notified appellants that the brief had not been timely filed and
that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this
letter, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly
injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief.  To date, no response has been
received from appellants.  
	Appellants have failed to either reasonably explain their failure to file a brief, file a
motion for extension of time to file their brief, or file their brief.  Accordingly, the appeal is
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). 
							PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and
filed this the 28th day of May, 2009.