Court Opinion

ID: 2925688
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:25:26.762731+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:56.657297
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-07-00601-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

DIANA C. DIAZ, D.D.S, P.C. AND DIANA N. DIAZ,                                Appellants,

                                            v.

JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,                          Appellee.
_____________________________________________________________

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

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

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

       Appellants, Diana C. Diaz, D.D.S. and Diana N. Diaz, appealed a judgment entered

by the 197th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. On October 2, 2007, the Clerk of

this Court notified appellants that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 9.5(e). See TEX . R. APP. P. 9.5(e).
       The Clerk directed appellants to file an amended notice of appeal with the district

clerk's office within 30 days from the date of that notice. On January 8, the Clerk notified

appellants that the defect had not been corrected and warned appellants that the appeal

would be dismissed if the defect were not cured within ten days. To date, the defect has

not been corrected, and the deputy clerk and court reporter have further informed this

Court that appellants have failed to request and make payment arrangements for the

appellate record in this cause. See TEX . R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c).

       The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s failure to

correct these defects, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 37.3,

42.3(b),(c).

       Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

                                                  PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered
and filed this the 17th day of April, 2008.

                                              2