Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest

Court of Appeals of Texas

Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest

DecidedAugust 10, 2012

Docket03-12-00269-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest (Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest) 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

Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00269-CV

Jonathan Smith, Appellant

v.

Camden Ridgecrest, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. C-1-CV-11-013433, HONORABLE J. DAVID PHILLIPS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Jonathan Smith has failed to prosecute his appeal. Smith's brief was due in this Court on May 21, 2012, and is overdue. On July 10, 2012, this Court's clerk sent Smith a notice informing him that his brief was overdue and cautioned that his appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless he filed a response reasonably explaining his failure to file a brief. The response was due by July 20, 2012. Although this notice has not been returned as undeliverable, previous notices sent to Smith have been.

We have been unable to locate a forwarding address for Smith. Nor have we received any communication from him in the more than three months since his notice of appeal was filed. Because Smith has not filed his brief, responded to the July 10, 2012 notice, provided this Court with a means to reach him, nor contacted this Court in any manner since filing his notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c).

_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: August 10, 2012

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

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00269-CV

Jonathan Smith, Appellant

v.

Camden Ridgecrest, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. C-1-CV-11-013433, HONORABLE J. DAVID PHILLIPS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Jonathan Smith has failed to prosecute his appeal. Smith's brief was due in this Court on May 21, 2012, and is overdue. On July 10, 2012, this Court's clerk sent Smith a notice informing him that his brief was overdue and cautioned that his appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless he filed a response reasonably explaining his failure to file a brief. The response was due by July 20, 2012. Although this notice has not been returned as undeliverable, previous notices sent to Smith have been.

We have been unable to locate a forwarding address for Smith. Nor have we received any communication from him in the more than three months since his notice of appeal was filed. Because Smith has not filed his brief, responded to the July 10, 2012 notice, provided this Court with a means to reach him, nor contacted this Court in any manner since filing his notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c).

_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: August 10, 2012

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jonathan Smith v. Camden Ridgecrest, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jonathan-smith-v-camden-ridgecrest-texapp-2012.