Court Opinion

ID: 6111787
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-24 08:15:59.776819+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:21.287014
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-21-00348-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

ALICIA THOMPSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND
AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
ESTATE OF CURTIS BROWN ESTATE,                                              Appellant,

                                           v.

REGENCY IHS OF WHARTON, LLC,                        Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 329th District Court
                   of Wharton County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Longoria
            Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

      Appellant, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal on October 12, 2021. On

October 14, 2021, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal was

not in compliance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 9.5, 25.1. To date, appellant has neither responded nor cured the defects in the

notice of appeal.

       Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign

any document filed and “give the party’s mailing address, telephone number, fax number,

if any, and email address.” Id. R. 9.1(b). On November 5, 2021, the Clerk of the Court

notified appellant that a filing fee was past due and if the fee was not paid within ten days,

the appeal would be dismissed. On November 22, 2021, the Clerk of the Court sent a

second notice regarding the defects in appellant’s notice of appeal. Each notice was

returned undeliverable and marked “unable to forward.” The clerk’s office contacted

appellant via telephone, and appellant indicated she had received the notices via email.

However, appellant has not taken any action to prosecute this appeal since October 2021.

       Furthermore, Rule 42.3 permits an appellate court, after giving ten days’ notice to

all parties, to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution or for failure to comply with a

requirement of the appellate rules. Id. R. 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

for want of prosecution. See id.

                                                                 GINA M. BENAVIDES
                                                                 Justice

Delivered and filed on the
20th day of January, 2022.

                                              2