Court Opinion

ID: 2924891
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:10:26.767002+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:15.812788
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-07-133-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

______________________________________________________________
 
CITY OF ABRAM, ET AL., 	Appellants,

v.

CITY OF MISSION, TEXAS,	Appellee. 
	____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 
Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
	The appellants' brief in the above cause was due on May 16, 2008.  On June 3,
2008, 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, appellants reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly
injured by the appellants' failure to timely file a brief.  To date, appellants have neither filed
their brief in this matter nor otherwise responded to the Court's notices.
	Appellants have failed to either reasonably explain their failure to file a brief, file a
motion for extension of time to file 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 29th day of August, 2008.