Court Opinion

ID: 2925062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:14:02.538687+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:52:44.042758
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-00126-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________
 
DAVID SOTO, 	APPELLANT,

v.

TEXAS STATE BANK,	APPELLEE.
_____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

	Appellant, David Soto, attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the
County Court at Law No. 2 of Hidalgo, County, Texas, in cause no. CL-06-2160-B.  Upon
review of the documents before the Court, the notice of appeal is not in compliance with
Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(d)(7).  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. 37.1,
42.3.   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 jurisdiction. 
Appellant failed to respond to the Court's notice. 
	The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct
the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction.  See id.  Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF
JURISDICTION.  See id. 42.3(b),(c).
									PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion delivered and 
filed this the 21st day of August, 2008.