Court Opinion

ID: 3099425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:59:05.835898+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:19:32.901582
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-11-00192-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

TAMMARA MAGEE LOFTUS,                                                        Appellant,

                                            v.

PATRICK DAVIS LOFTUS,                               Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 247th District Court
                    of Harris County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

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

       The appellant's brief in the above cause was due on September 2, 2011. On

September 29, 2011, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant 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, 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 her failure to file a brief, file a

motion for extension of time to file his brief, or file her brief. Accordingly, 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 27th
day of October, 2011.

                                             2