Court Opinion

ID: 3097710
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:46:24.389951+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:58:53.014937
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-11-00104-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

ROBERT SCOTT HOWELL,                                                       Appellant,

                                          v.

SANDRA LILIANA HOWELL,                              Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 444th District Court
                  of Cameron County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

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

      This case is before the Court on appellee’s motion to dismiss for failure to

prosecute. The appellant's brief in the above cause was originally due on July 22, 2011.

Appellant has previously requested and received two prior extensions of time to file the

brief. On November 9, 2011, this Court ordered the appellate brief to be filed on or

before November 14, 2011. The order notified counsel that further extensions would not
be favorably entertained. On December 7, 2011, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant

that the brief had not been 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, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the

appellee was not significantly injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. To

date, no response has been received from appellant.

       Appellant has failed to either reasonably explain his failure to file a brief, file a

motion for extension of time to file his brief, or file his brief. Accordingly, appellee’s

motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF

PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b).

                                                                      PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
16th day of February, 2012.

                                             2