in the Matter of E. M. W. Jr.
This text of in the Matter of E. M. W. Jr. (in the Matter of E. M. W. Jr.) 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.
Opinion
APPELLANT
PER CURIAM
This is a dismissal for want of prosecution.
The trial court rendered the order underlying this appeal on September 21, 1992. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial. The record in the above cause was due to be filed in this Court on November 20, 1992. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a). Appellant filed an untimely motion for extension of time to file the transcript on December 11, 1992. Tex. R. App. P. 54(c).
If the appellant fails to file either the transcript or the statement of facts within the prescribed time, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a). Appellant has not filed the transcript. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Veale v. Rose, 688 S.W.2d 600 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.).
[Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Jones]
Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
Filed: April 21, 1993
[Do Not Publish]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in the Matter of E. M. W. Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-e-m-w-jr-texapp-1993.