Court Opinion

ID: 2925719
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:25:58.544767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:30.304134
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-07-00499-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

JUAN A. PORRAS,                                                              Appellant,

                                            v.

LARRY WARNER,                                       Appellee.
_____________________________________________________________

             On Appeal from the 107th District Court
                   of Cameron County, Texas.
______________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

           Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, Juan A. Porras, perfected an appeal from a judgment rendered against

him in favor of appellee, Larry Warner, in a legal malpractice action. On September 7,

2007, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause

was originally due on August 27, 2007, and that the deputy district clerk, Laura Cisneros,
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),(c).

       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 failed to respond to the Court’s notice, and has further failed to make

arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record in this cause..

       The Court, having considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the

appeal should be dismissed. See id. 37.3(b), 42.3(b),(c).

       Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.

                                                  PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered
and filed this the 10th day of April, 2008.

                                              2