Mae Fields and Thomas Betts v. Corrections Corporation of American and Warden Orlando Perez

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 13, 2012
Docket13-12-00569-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Mae Fields and Thomas Betts v. Corrections Corporation of American and Warden Orlando Perez (Mae Fields and Thomas Betts v. Corrections Corporation of American and Warden Orlando Perez) 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
Mae Fields and Thomas Betts v. Corrections Corporation of American and Warden Orlando Perez, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-12-00569-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

MAE FIELDS AND THOMAS BETTS, ET AL, Appellants,

v.

CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICAN AND WARDEN ORLANDO PEREZ, Appellees. ____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 197th District Court of Willacy County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, Mae Fields and Thomas Betts, et al., perfected an appeal from a

judgment rendered against them in favor of appellees, Corrections Corporation of

American and Warden Orlando Perez. On November 5, 2012, the Clerk of this Court

notified appellants that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due on October 17, 2012, and that the district clerk, Gilbert Lozano, had notified this Court that

appellants failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The Clerk of

this Court notified appellants of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the

defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Appellants were

advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this

notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution.

Appellants have failed to respond to this Court’s notice. Accordingly, the appeal

is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 13th day of December, 2012.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mae Fields and Thomas Betts v. Corrections Corporation of American and Warden Orlando Perez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mae-fields-and-thomas-betts-v-corrections-corporat-texapp-2012.