Charles Matlock, Individually and D/B/A Matlock Insurance Agency v. Kenneth Fitzgerald and Gayle Fitzgerald and Buford Narramore and Sharon Narramore

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 2, 2014
• Docket: 11-14-00159-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion filed October 2, 2014

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-14-00159-CV __________

CHARLES MATLOCK, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A MATLOCK INSURANCE AGENCY, Appellant V. KENNETH FITZGERALD AND GAYLE FITZGERALD AND BUFORD NARRAMORE AND SHARON NARRAMORE, Appellees

On Appeal from the 35th District Court Brown County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV-1207249

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Charles Matlock, individually and d/b/a Matlock Insurance Agency, filed a notice of appeal on June 5, 2014. According to the district clerk, Appellant has not filed a designation of record or paid for the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2). We notified Appellant by letter that the clerk’s record was due to be filed on September 18, 2014, that Appellant must resolve this matter by September 23, 2014, and that this appeal would be subject to dismissal if Appellant failed to timely resolve this matter and provide proof to this court regarding the resolution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). We have received no response from Appellant, nor have we received any proof that Appellant has filed a designation of record, paid for the clerk’s record, or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. Accordingly, Appellant has not timely resolved the matter involving the clerk’s record.1 Consequently, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

October 2, 2014 Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson, J., and Bailey, J.

1 We note also that the judgment from which Appellant attempts to appeal—an order denying Appellant’s motions for summary judgment—does not appear to be a final, appealable order as it does not dispose of all parties and all claims.