Court Opinion

ID: 2926048
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 22:22:01.114562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:40.741096
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-09-00310-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

JAIME ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ,                                                      Appellant,

                                            v.

CAPITAL ONE, N. A.,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

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

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                 Before Justices Yañez, Benavides, and Vela
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
       The appellant's brief in the above cause was due on July 3, 2009. On October 23,

2009, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the brief had not been timely filed and

that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this

letter, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly
injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. To date, no response has been

received from appellant.

       Appellant has failed to either reasonably explain his failure to file a brief, file a

motion for extension of time to file his brief, or file his brief. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX . R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b).

                                                                       PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
10th day of December, 2009.

                                             2