Court Opinion

ID: 3103204
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 05:27:31.938345+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:32.022508
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-11-00069-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

RAMON DONATO GARCIA,                                                         Appellant,

                                            v.

PRISCILLA ZAVALA,                                   Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 444th District Court
                  of Cameron County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
       Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Ramon Donato Garcia, filed an appeal from a judgment rendered

against him in favor of appellee, Priscilla Zavala. On May 25, 2011, the Clerk of this

Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due on

March 15, 2011, and that the deputy district clerk, Freddy Cardoza, had notified this Court

that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The Clerk
of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the

defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b), (c).          Appellant was

advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this

notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution.

       On May 5, 2011, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that he was delinquent in

remitting a $175.00 filing fee. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the appeal

was subject to dismissal if the filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of

receipt of this letter. See id. 42.3(b), (c).

       Appellant has failed to respond to this Court=s notices and has failed to pay the

filing fee. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                                 PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
28th day of July, 2011.

                                                2