Court Opinion

ID: 3095247
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:28:23.019221+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:28:59.456970
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-12-00041-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                      CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

       IN THE INTEREST OF G.E.C. III AND B.L.C., CHILDREN
___________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 317th District Court
                  of Jefferson County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
           Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela
                      Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, George Clark, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the 317th

District Court of Jefferson County, Texas, in cause number C-205,695E. On April 2,

2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause

was originally due on March 14, 2012, and that the deputy district clerk, Martiza Downs,

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 the Court’s notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution.

The notice was sent to appellant’s address by certified mail return receipt requested;

however, the certified mail was returned as unclaimed and unable to forward.

Subsequently, the Clerk of the Court sent the notice to appellant by regular mail on April

26, 2012.

       On April 26, 2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that he was delinquent

in remitting a $175.00 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. Accordingly, the appeal is

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

                                                   PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
21st day of June, 2012.

                                               2