Court Opinion

ID: 9409226
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-17 11:07:53.089605+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:49.253204
License: Public Domain

Opinion issued July 11, 2023

                                        In The

                                 Court of Appeals
                                       For The

                             First District of Texas
                              ————————————
                                 NO. 01-22-00582-CV
                              ———————————
      GCT LOGISTICS, LLC, STEPHEN J. GILBREATH, AND ROBIN
                      GILBREATH, Appellants
                                          V.
                          CHARTER PIPE, LLC, Appellee

                On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 3
                              Harris County, Texas
                          Trial Court Case No. 1172782

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Appellants, GCT Logistics, LLC, Stephen J. Gilbreath, and Robin Gilbreath,

filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s May 10, 2022 judgment. Appellants

have failed to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a) (governing time to file

brief).
      On September 1, 2022, the court reporter notified the Court that no reporter’s

record was taken in this case, and on September 17, 2022, the clerk’s record was

filed. Accordingly, appellants’ brief was due to be filed on or before October 19,

2022. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellants did not file an appellants’ brief.

      On October 25, 2022, the Clerk of this Court notified appellants that this

appeal was subject to dismissal unless a brief, or a motion to extend time to file a

brief, was filed within ten days of the notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (governing

failure of appellant to file brief), 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of appeal

for want of prosecution), 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case for failure

to comply with notice from Clerk of Court). Despite the notice that this appeal was

subject to dismissal, appellants did not adequately respond.

      Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(b), 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.

                                  PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.

                                          2