Marcus W. Ray v. Generation Grove Apartments

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 9, 2023
Docket01-22-00705-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Marcus W. Ray v. Generation Grove Apartments (Marcus W. Ray v. Generation Grove Apartments) 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
Marcus W. Ray v. Generation Grove Apartments, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Opinion issued February 9, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-22-00705-CV ——————————— MARCUS W. RAY, Appellant V. GENERATION GROVE APARTMENTS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 4 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1189375

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Marcus W. Ray, has failed to timely file a brief. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 38.6(a) (governing time to file brief). Appellant filed a notice of appeal from the

trial court’s September 27, 2022 final judgment. The clerk’s record was filed on November 22, 2022, and on November 28,

2022, the Court received notice that there is no reporter’s record for this case.

Accordingly, appellant’s brief was due to be filed on or before December 28, 2022.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellant did not file an appellant’s brief.

On January 12, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that this appeal

was subject to dismissal unless a brief, or a motion to extend time to file a brief, was

filed within ten days of the notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (governing failure of

appellant to file brief), 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of appeal for want of

prosecution), 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case for failure to comply

with notice from Clerk of Court). Despite the notice that this appeal was subject to

dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond to the January 12, 2023 notice.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.3(b), 43.2(f). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Countiss and Rivas-Molloy.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Marcus W. Ray v. Generation Grove Apartments, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marcus-w-ray-v-generation-grove-apartments-texapp-2023.