Court Opinion

ID: 3094588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:22:55.731262+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:06.890470
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-12-000340-CV

                                      COURT OF APPEALS

                          THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                             CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

  IN THE INTEREST OF A.R., A.B.R., A.L.A., A.L.A., A.J.R., CHILDREN
____________________________________________________________

              On Appeal from the 430th District Court
                    of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

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

           Appellant, S.R. 1 , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 430th

District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CW-034-11-J. On June 26,

2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause

was originally due on May 29, 2012, and that the deputy district clerk, Aida Villarreal, had

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

      Appellant has failed to respond to this Court=s notice. Accordingly, the appeal is

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

                                                PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the
19th day of July, 2012.

                                            2