Court Opinion

ID: 4515421
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-03-12 14:18:34.557708+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:30.080559
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-20-00056-CV

                           COURT OF APPEALS

                 THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

OSCAR GARZA JR.,                                                         Appellant,

                                         v.

SALOMON TAMEZ JR., SAL-EST
INCORPORATED DBA CARFINDERS
AND CARFINDERS CAR RENTAL, L.L.C.,                 Appellees.
____________________________________________________________

            On appeal from County Court at Law No. 8
                   of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa
            Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

      Appellant, Oscar Garza Jr., attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment

entered by the County Court at Law No. 8 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number

CL-18-1615-H. Judgment in this cause was signed on October 10, 2019. A motion for

new trial was filed on November 6, 2019. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure
26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on January 8, 2020 but was not filed until

January 24, 2020.

       On January 27, 2020, 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. Appellant was advised that,

if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the letter, the

appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant.

Additionally, appellant has failed to pay the requisite filing fee.

          The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file,

appellant’s failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s failure to respond to this

Court’s notice, is of the opinion the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3(a)(c).

                                                                  DORI CONTRERAS
                                                                  Chief Justice

Delivered and filed the
12th day of March, 2020.

                                               2