Court Opinion

ID: 3122989
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 14:34:29.376215+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:13:46.489820
License: Public Domain

NUMBERS
13-10-00394-CV
 
                                 COURT
OF APPEALS
 
                     THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                         CORPUS
CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________
 
IN THE INTEREST OF R.E.S., III,
J.D.S. AND A.E.S., CHILDREN
____________________________________________________________
 
                            On
appeal from the 36th District Court 
                                   of
San Patricio County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
 
                               MEMORANDUM
OPINION
 
                  Before Justices
Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
 

Appellant, R.S.[1],
perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 36th District Court of San
Patricio County, Texas, in cause number S-09-5052-FL-A.  On June 15, 2010, the Clerk of this
Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was
originally due on March 5, 2010, and that the deputy district clerk, Ernestina
Roblez, 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.  Appellant failed to respond to the Court=s notices.  
The
Court, having considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appeal
should be dismissed for want of prosecution.  See id. 37.3,
42.3(b),(c).  Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.  Any pending motions are dismissed
as moot.                                  
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
24th day of August, 2010. 
 
 
 

[1]
In appeals from cases involving the
termination of parental rights, the rules of appellate procedure require the
use of an alias to refer to a minor, Aand if necessary to protect the minor=s identity, to the minor=s parent or other family member.”  Tex. R. App. P.
9.8.