Marc Rosenthal and Rosenthal & Watson, P. C. v. Jim Solis D/B/A Law Office of Jim Solis

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 4, 2012
• Docket: 13-12-00316-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-12-00316-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

MARC ROSENTHAL AND ROSENTHAL & WATSON, P. C., Appellants,

v.

JIM SOLIS D/B/A LAW OFFICE OF JIM SOLIS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 138th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

The appellants’ brief in the above cause was due on July 18, 2012. On August

14, 2012, the Clerk of the Court notified appellants that the brief had not been timely filed

and that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter, appellants reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly

injured by the appellants’ failure to timely file a brief. To date, no response has been

received from appellants.

Appellants have failed to either reasonably explain their failure to file a brief, file a

motion for extension of time to file their brief, or file their brief. Accordingly, the appeal is

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 4th day of October, 2012.