Court Opinion

ID: 3101957
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 05:17:53.859551+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:13:56.335703
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
13-11-00326-CV
 
                                 COURT
OF APPEALS
 
                     THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                         CORPUS
CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________
 
REYES URBINA,                                                                           Appellant,
 
                                                             v.
 
DESIGNER HOMES CO.,
INC., ONESIMO 
MARTINEZ, XAVIER
VILLESCAS [ERRONEOUSLY 
SUED AS JAVIER
BILOLESCAS OR BILLESCAS], 
COMPASS BANK AND
GREGORY S. KAZEN, 
IN HIS CAPACITY ONLY
AS SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE,          Appellees. 
____________________________________________________________
 
                          On
Appeal from the 275th District Court 
                                       of
Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
 
                               MEMORANDUM
OPINION
 
                           Before Justices Benavides, Vela, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion
Per Curiam
 

This
matter is before the Court on a defective notice of appeal and appellant's
failure to correct the defect.  On June 2, 2011, the Court advised appellant
that the notice of appeal was not in compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate
Procedure 25.1(d)(2) and 9.5(e)(3).  See
Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(d)(2), 9.5(e)(3). 
The Clerk directed appellant to file an amended notice of appeal with the
district clerk's office within 30 days from the date of that notice.  
On
July 19, 2011, the Clerk notified appellant that the defects had not been
corrected and warned appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if the defects
were not cured within ten days.  Appellant has failed to correct the defects or
otherwise respond to the Court's notices.
            On its own motion, with
ten days notice to the parties, an appellate court may dismiss a civil appeal
for want of prosecution or failure to comply with a notice from the clerk
requiring a response or other action within a specified time.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c).  Accordingly,
we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and failure to comply with a
notice from the Court.  See
id.

                                                                                    PER
CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 
25th day of August, 2011.