Court Opinion

ID: 2923474
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 03:31:14.959594+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:30.170383
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-05-745-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
_______________________________________________________
 
CHRISTOPHER
M. WEAVER,                                      Appellant,
 
                                           v.
 
INGRID
E. WEAVER,                                                  Appellee.
_______________________________________________________
 
                  On appeal from the 370th
District Court
                           of Hidalgo
County, Texas.
_______________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
                Before Justices
Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza
                       Memorandum Opinion Per
Curiam
 

Appellant, CHRISTOPHER
M. WEAVER, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the   370th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number F-3547-02-G.  The clerk=s record was received on December 2,
2005.  No reporter=s record was filed.  Appellant=s brief was due on January 3, 2006.  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 January
13, 2006, 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 has been received.
The Court, having
examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to file a
proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and
appellant=s failure to respond,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
prosecution.  The appeal is hereby
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
PER CURIAM
 
Memorandum Opinion delivered and 
filed this the 9th day of March, 2006