Court Opinion

ID: 3088487
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 03:24:35.98512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:09:59.178804
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-13-00211-CV

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

LAWRENCE EUGENE FERNANDEZ,                                                   Appellant,

                                            v.

CESAR GARCIA,                                       Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 404th District Court
                  of Cameron County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
             Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Longoria
                      Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, Lawrence Eugene Fernandez, perfected an appeal from a judgment

rendered against him in favor of appellee, Cesar Garcia. On June 19, 2013, the Clerk of

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

on June 10, 2013, and that the district clerk, Jesus Cantu, 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.

       The notice was sent to appellant’s address by certified mail return receipt

requested; however, the certified mail was returned as unclaimed and unable to forward.

Subsequently, the Clerk of the Court sent the notice to appellant by regular mail.

       Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notices. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

                                                                        PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 5th
day of September, 2013.

                                              2