Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia

Court of Appeals of Texas

Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia

DecidedJuly 20, 2022

Docket12-22-00082-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia (Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

NO. 12-22-00082-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

BEATRICE PRIMEAUX, § APPEAL FROM THE APPELLANT

V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1

NINFA HELEN MEZA GARCIA, APPELLEE § JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). Beatrice Primeaux, acting pro se, perfected this appeal on March 8, 2022. The clerk’s record was filed on March 30 and the reporter’s record was filed on May 26. Appellant’s brief was due by June 27. On June 29, this Court notified Appellant that the brief was past due. We further notified Appellant that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution unless a motion for extension of time, containing a reasonable explanation for the failure to file a brief and showing that Appellee has not suffered material injury thereby, is filed no later than July 11. The July 11 deadline passed and Appellant has not filed a brief, a motion for leave to file a late brief, or a motion for extension of time. 2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Opinion delivered July 20, 2022. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

1 This case was transferred to this Court from the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas, pursuant to a docket equalization order. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2013). 2 Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.). COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JULY 20, 2022

BEATRICE PRIMEAUX, Appellant V. NINFA HELEN MEZA GARCIA, Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Jefferson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 136,487)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that the appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of prosecution; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

NO. 12-22-00082-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

BEATRICE PRIMEAUX, § APPEAL FROM THE APPELLANT

V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1

NINFA HELEN MEZA GARCIA, APPELLEE § JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). Beatrice Primeaux, acting pro se, perfected this appeal on March 8, 2022. The clerk’s record was filed on March 30 and the reporter’s record was filed on May 26. Appellant’s brief was due by June 27. On June 29, this Court notified Appellant that the brief was past due. We further notified Appellant that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution unless a motion for extension of time, containing a reasonable explanation for the failure to file a brief and showing that Appellee has not suffered material injury thereby, is filed no later than July 11. The July 11 deadline passed and Appellant has not filed a brief, a motion for leave to file a late brief, or a motion for extension of time. 2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Opinion delivered July 20, 2022. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

1 This case was transferred to this Court from the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas, pursuant to a docket equalization order. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2013). 2 Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.). COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JULY 20, 2022

BEATRICE PRIMEAUX, Appellant V. NINFA HELEN MEZA GARCIA, Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Jefferson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 136,487)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that the appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of prosecution; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Beatrice Primeaux, and All Other Occupants v. Ninfa Helen Meza Garcia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beatrice-primeaux-and-all-other-occupants-v-ninfa-helen-meza-garcia-texapp-2022.