Court Opinion

ID: 2922181
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 02:53:26.008598+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:24:57.613247
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
13-04-669-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
_________________________________
_________________________________
 
HOMER SALAZAR, JR., D/B/A NICOLES 
TRANSPORTATION, ET AL.,                                     Appellants,
 
                                           v.
 
SUNLINE
COMMERCIAL CARRIERS, INC.,                     Appellee.
__________________________
________________________________________
 
             On appeal from the County
Court at Law No. 2
                          of Cameron
County, Texas.
________________
__________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
                Before Justices
Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza
                       Memorandum Opinion Per
Curiam
 

Appellants, HOMER SALAZAR, JR., D/B/A NICOLES TRANSPORTATION, ET AL., perfected
an appeal from a judgment entered by the 
County Court at Law No. 2 of Cameron
County, Texas, in cause number 2002-CCL-00719-B.  The clerk=s record was filed on March 7, 2005.  The reporter=s record was filed on March 17, 2005.  Appellants= brief was due on July 15, 2005.  To date, no appellate brief has been
received.
When the appellant has
failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal
for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure
and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant=s failure to timely
file a brief.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).
On July
22, 2005, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to
dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellants were given ten days to explain why
the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief.  To date, no response has been received.
The Court, having
examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants= failure to file a
proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and
appellants= failure to respond,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
prosecution.  The appeal is hereby
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
PER CURIAM
 
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed
this the 31st day of August, 2005