Mark Haddard, Personal Representative for the Estate of Virginia L. Potter and Virginia L. Potter v. Mary Medina Rios

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 16, 2008
Docket13-07-00648-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Mark Haddard, Personal Representative for the Estate of Virginia L. Potter and Virginia L. Potter v. Mary Medina Rios (Mark Haddard, Personal Representative for the Estate of Virginia L. Potter and Virginia L. Potter v. Mary Medina Rios) 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
Mark Haddard, Personal Representative for the Estate of Virginia L. Potter and Virginia L. Potter v. Mary Medina Rios, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-08-00323-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ______________________________________________________________

DELIA GORENA, APPELLANT,

v.

BETRESSA BLACKWELL AND JESSICA LYNN BLACKWELL, APPELLEES. _____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas. ______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yanez, Garza and Vela Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Delia Gorena, perfected an appeal from a judgment rendered against her

in favor of appellee, Betressa Blackwell and Jessica Lynn Blackwell. On August 26, 2008,

the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was

originally due on June 5, 2008, and that the district clerk, Laura Miller, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The

Clerk of this Court notified appellant 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). Appellant was

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.

Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notice. Accordingly, the appeal is

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

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this the 16th day of October, 2008.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mark Haddard, Personal Representative for the Estate of Virginia L. Potter and Virginia L. Potter v. Mary Medina Rios, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mark-haddard-personal-representative-for-the-estat-texapp-2008.