Court Opinion

ID: 2922464
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 02:57:20.284857+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:55:14.540271
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
13-05-012-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
___________________________________________________________________
 
GLENDA TORRES,                                                    Appellant,
 
                                           v.
 
R. Y. LIVESTOCK SALES, INC.,                                   Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________
 
                On appeal from County
Court at Law No. 1
                           of Hidalgo
County, Texas.
___________________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
                Before Justices Hinojosa,
Yañez, and Garza
                       Memorandum Opinion Per
Curiam
 

Appellant, GLENDA TORRES, perfected an appeal from a
judgment entered by County Court at Law No. 1 of Hidalgo
County, Texas, in cause number CL-25,456-A.  The clerk=s record was filed on January 21,
2005.  The reporter=s record was filed on April 22, 2005.  Appellant=s brief was due on May 23, 2005.  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 June 1, 2005, 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 30th
 day of June, 2005