Jesus A. Carrion v. Aluminum Company of America

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 2, 2006
• Docket: 13-04-00507-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                             NUMBER 13-04-507-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

JESUS A. CARRION, ET AL.,                                    Appellants,

                                           v.

ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA, ET AL.,               Appellees.

                  On appeal from the 117th District Court

                           of Nueces County, Texas.

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

                Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, JESUS A. CARRION, ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 04-3806-H.  The clerk=s record was filed on October 31, 2005.  No reporter=s record was filed.  Appellants= brief was due on November 30, 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 January 13, 2006, 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 2nd day of March, 2006.