Court Opinion

ID: 2892559
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 21:54:33.929285+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:31:32.398202
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-05-0062-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

MARCH 31, 2005

______________________________

ARMAND BIGLARI AND BIGLARI & ASSOCIATES, APPELLANTS

V.

HUGH D. REED DBA REYATA ENTERPRISES, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 33RD DISTRICT COURT OF BURNET COUNTY;

NO. 22983; HONORABLE GUILFORD L. JONES, III, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Armand Biglari filed a notice of appeal, on his behalf and that of Biglari & Associates, from a judgment in favor of appellee Hugh D. Reed dba Reyata Enterprises.  The appellate record was complete on filing of the reporter’s record January 20, 2005.  
See
 Tex. R. App. P. 
34.1.  By letters dated March 3 and March 16, 2005,  the clerk of this court notified Biglari that appellants’ brief was due February 22, 2005, but had yet to be filed.  
See
 
Tex. R. App. P.
 38.6(a), 38.8.  The letters further advised Biglari that the appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution if the brief, or a response reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief with a showing that appellee had not been injured by the delay, was not filed by March 28, 2005.  No brief, motion for extension or other response has been received.  

Accordingly, we now dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and failure to comply with a directive of the court.  
See
 
Tex. R. App. P.
 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b), (c).    

James T. Campbell

        Justice