Court Opinion

ID: 3101929
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 05:17:38.174096+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:48:17.373363
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-10-00288-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                      CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

           IN THE INTEREST OF R.F.M., A MINOR CHILD
____________________________________________________________

             On Appeal from the 343rd District Court
                 of San Patricio County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

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

       Appellant's brief in the above cause was due on May 19, 2011. On June 7, 2011,

the Court notified appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of

prosecution unless, within ten days, appellant reasonably explained his failure to file the

brief and the appellee was not significantly injured by his failure to do so. The notice was

sent certified mail to appellant's last known forwarding address; however, the notice was

returned unclaimed. Upon receiving the returned mail, the Court resent the notice to
appellant at same address by regular mail. To date, no response has been received

from appellant.

       Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign

any document filed and "give the party's mailing address, telephone number, and fax

number, if any." See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.1(b). Appellant has neither provided this Court

with a forwarding address nor taken any other action to prosecute this appeal.

       Rule 42.3 permits an appellate court, on its own initiative after giving ten days'

notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution or for failure to comply

with a requirement of the appellate rules. See id. 42.3(b), (c). Rule 2 authorizes an

appellate court to suspend a rule's operation in a particular case to expedite a decision.

See id. 2. Given the length of inactivity in this appeal and this court's inability to give

effective notice to appellant during the period of inactivity, we suspend Rule 42.3's

requirement of ten days' notice to all parties, and dismiss the appeal on our own motion.

See id. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                  PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
26th day of August, 2011.

                                             2