Court Opinion

ID: 3086583
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 02:51:14.518583+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:10:03.517132
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-13-00601-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

                THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

DANTE ROBINSON AND
CHARLOTTE M. LEWIS-ROBINSON,
INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A AALTO
AUTO SALES,                                                          Appellants,

                                       v.

SERGIO ALEJANDRO VALLE
RAMIREZ, A/K/A SERGIO O. VALLE,                     Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

          On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2
                    of Travis County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                      MEMORANDUM OPINION
  Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria
                 Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

     Appellants filed an appeal from a judgment rendered by the County Court at Law

No. 2 of Travis County in cause number C-1-CV-12-011037.         This appeal was
transferred to this Court from the Third Court of Appeals by order of the Texas Supreme

Court. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 22.220(a) (West Supp. 2011) (delineating the

jurisdiction of appellate courts); TEX.GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2005) (granting

the supreme court the authority to transfer cases from one court of appeals to another at

any time that there is “good cause” for the transfer).

       On January 22, 2014, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's

record in the above cause was originally due on December 27, 2013, and that the deputy

district clerk, C. Jones, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make arrangements

for payment of the clerk's record. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect

so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within

ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want

of prosecution.

       On January 14, 2014, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that she was

delinquent in remitting a $195.00 filing fee. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that

the appeal was subject to dismissal if the filing fee was not paid within ten days from the

date of receipt of this letter. See id. 42.3(b),(c).

       Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notices and has failed to pay the

filing fee. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                   PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
6th day of March, 2014.

                                               2