Court Opinion

ID: 3086350
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 02:48:57.770853+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:09:12.504314
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-13-00599-CV

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

NITA WINKLER,                                                                        APPELLANT,

                                                   v.

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION,           APPELLEE.
____________________________________________________________

          On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3
                      of Bell County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                              MEMORANDUM OPINION
                    Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes
                         Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

        Appellant, Nita Winkler, perfected an appeal from a judgment rendered against her

in favor of appellee, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation.1 On February 11, 2014,

1This case is before the Court on transfer from the Third Court of Appeals in Austin pursuant to a docket
equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West
2005).
the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was

originally due on August 9, 2013, and that the district clerk, Shelley Coston, 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.

      Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notice. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                 PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
27th day of March, 2014.

                                            2