Court Opinion

ID: 2927425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 22:53:18.005963+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:08.867899
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-00669-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

JOSE LUIS AVILA,                                                            Appellant,

                                           v.

DIANA LOPEZ AVILA,                                  Appellee.
_____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 197th District Court
                   of Cameron County, Texas.
______________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

                   Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela
                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Jose Luis Avila, appealed a judgment rendered against him in favor of

appellee, Diana Lopez Avila. On November 20, 2008, the Clerk of this Court notified

appellant that the notice of appeal did not comply with Tex. R. App. P. 25.1 and 9.5, and
directed appellant to file an amended notice of appeal with the trial court and appellate

court within thirty days. To date the appellant has not responded to this Court’s notice.

       On December 8, 2008, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk’s

record in the above cause was originally due on December 8, 2008, and that the deputy

district clerk, Christina Tusa, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make

arrangements for payment of the clerk’s record. 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. See

TEX . R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b). Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected

within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for

want of prosecution.

       Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notices. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX . R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                               PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and
filed this the 29th day of January, 2009.

                                            2