Maritza Quintanilla v. Abel Quintanilla

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 11, 2004
Docket13-03-00514-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Maritza Quintanilla v. Abel Quintanilla (Maritza Quintanilla v. Abel Quintanilla) 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
Maritza Quintanilla v. Abel Quintanilla, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-03-514-CV



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________



MARITZA QUINTANILLA, Appellant,



v.


ABEL QUINTANILLA, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________



On appeal from the 93rd District Court
of Hidalgo County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________



MEMORANDUM OPINION



Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam



Appellant, MARITZA QUINTANILLA, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-3614-99-B. The notice of appeal was filed on September 5, 2003. On September 12, 2003, appellant was advised that the notice of appeal did not comply with Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(e). To date, appellant has failed to file an amended notice of appeal. Pursuant to Tex. Gov't Code §51.207(b)(1) and § 51.941(a)(1), a filing fee in the amount of $125.00 is due upon the filing of an appeal. To date, appellant has failed to pay the filing fee.

On September 12, 2003 and on November 20, 2003, pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), notice was given to appellant that this appeal was subject to dismissal for failure to comply with the rules. To date, appellant has failed to respond to this Court's notices. On February 25, 2004, appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of prosecution.

The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to comply with the rules, and appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. Appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 11th day of March, 2004.



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

Related

§ 51.207
Texas GV § 51.207(b)(1)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Maritza Quintanilla v. Abel Quintanilla, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maritza-quintanilla-v-abel-quintanilla-texapp-2004.