Court Opinion

ID: 2920745
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 01:45:39.933313+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:25:07.072547
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-03-450-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_________________________________________________________

RAUL ALANIZ,	Appellant,

v.

UNIVISION D/B/A ENTRAVISION COMMUNICATIONS 
CO., L.L.P., D/B/A VALLEY CH. 48, INC., ET AL.,	Appellees.
_________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 139th District Court
of Hidalgo County, Texas.
________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam

	Appellant, RAUL ALANIZ, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 
139th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-892-00-C-1.  The
clerk's record was filed on August 12, 2003.  The reporter's record was filed on
August 29, 2003.  Appellant's brief was due on October 11, 2003. To date, no
appellate brief has been received.
	When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court
may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably
explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant's failure
to timely file a brief.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).
	On November 4, 2003, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was
subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellant was given ten
days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief.  To
date, no response from appellant has been received.  Appellees have filed a motion for
involuntary dismissal of the appeal.
	The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file,
appellant's failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, appellant's failure
to respond, and appellees' motion to dismiss, is of the opinion that the appeal should
be dismissed for want of prosecution.  Appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal is
GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
							PER CURIAM

Opinion delivered and filed
this the 26th day of November, 2003