Court Opinion

ID: 9929700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-03 18:11:28.019416+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:45:17.378281
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-23-00458-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

SERGIO CHAVEZ AND
MARIA D. GARCIA,                                                        Appellants,

                                              v.

ALEJANDRO MORENO,                                                          Appellee.

               On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1
                        of Hidalgo County, Texas.

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

 Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina
         Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

      On October 25, 2023, appellants filed a notice of appeal. On October 26, 2023, the

Clerk of the Court notified appellants that their notice of appeal was not in compliance

with the Texas Rule of Appellant Procedure 9.1(c)(1). See TEX. R. APP. P.
9.1(c)(1). Appellants were also asked to remit the $205.00 filing fee within ten days from

the date of the notice.

       On November 15, 2023, the Clerk of the Court again notified appellants of the

defects and that they were delinquent in remitting a $205.00 filing fee. The Clerk of this

Court notified appellants the appeal was subject to dismissal if the filing fee was not paid

within ten days from the date of the notice. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c).

       Furthermore, the clerk’s record was due on December 18, 2023. On January 2,

2024, the Clerk of the Court notified appellants that the deputy district clerk, Sarah Reyes,

informed the Court that appellants failed to make arrangements for payment of the

clerk’s record. Appellants were notified that unless they made arrangements to pay for

the clerk’s record and proof of payment was provided to the Court within ten days, the

appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. See id. R. R. 37.3(b).

       Appellants have not cured the defective notice of appeal, paid the filing fee, and

no clerk’s record has been filed due to appellants’ failure to pay or make payment

arrangements. Additionally, appellants have failed to comply with a notice from the Clerk

of the Court requiring a response or other action within the time specified; accordingly,

the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. R. 42.3(b),(c).

                                                                        DORI CONTRERAS
                                                                        Chief Justice

Delivered and filed on the
1st day of February, 2024.

                                             2