Court Opinion

ID: 2920087
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 01:17:43.418842+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:44:50.718837
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-02-401-CV
 
                             COURT OF APPEALS
 
                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                                CORPUS CHRISTI
____________________________________________________________________
 
HECTOR
VIRGILIO ZAMORA AND 
IRMA CANTU DE ZAMORA,                                                 Appellants,
 
                                                   v.
 
VALLEY
UROLOGICAL CLINIC, R. G. DEL 
VILLAR, M.D. AND MISSION
HOSPITAL, INC.,                        Appellees.
____________________________________________________________________
 
                         On appeal from the 93rd District Court
                                  of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________________
 
                                   O P I N I O N
 
                   Before Justices
Dorsey, Rodriguez, and Castillo
                                       Opinion Per Curiam
 

Appellants, HECTOR VIRGILIO ZAMORA AND IRMA CANTU DE ZAMORA, perfected an
appeal from a judgment entered by the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-891-00-B.  The clerk=s record was filed on July 15, 2002.  No reporter=s record was filed.   Appellants= brief was due on August 14, 2002.
To date, no appellate brief has been received
When the appellant has
failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal
for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure
and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant=s failure to timely
file a brief.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).
On October 8, 2002,
notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal
pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellants were
given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to
file a brief.  To date, no response has
been received.
The Court, having
examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants= failure to file a
proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and
appellants= failure to respond,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
prosecution.  The appeal is hereby
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.
Opinion delivered and filed
this the 27th
day of November, 2002