Mary Ashley Gomez v. Juan Jose Rojas
This text of Mary Ashley Gomez v. Juan Jose Rojas (Mary Ashley Gomez v. Juan Jose Rojas) 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-23-00418-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
MARY ASHLEY GOMEZ, Appellant,
v.
JUAN JOSE ROJAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Longoria, Silva, and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria
Appellant filed a notice of appeal on September 29, 2023. On October 2, 2023, the
Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal was defective and did not
comply with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b), 9.5(e), and 25.1(d)(2), (4), and
(8). See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.1, 9.5, 25.1(d). On November 3, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the appeal
was subject to dismissal if a filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of the
notice. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c). Additionally, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of the
defects in her notice of appeal had not been corrected and that the appeal was subject to
dismissal if the defects were not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the
letter. See id. R. 42.3(b), (c). On November 13, 2023, both of the Clerk’s mailed notices
were returned to sender and marked “return to sender,” “insufficient address,” and “unable
to forward.” A copy of each notice was emailed to appellant’s only known email address.
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign
any document filed and “give the party’s mailing address, telephone number, fax number,
if any, and email address.” See id. R. 9.1(b). The clerk’s office does not have a telephone
number for appellant, and the district clerk did not have any additional contact information
for the appellant.
Furthermore, Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 permits an appellate court,
on its own initiative after giving ten days’ notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for
want of prosecution or for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules. See
id. R. 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id. R.
42.3.
NORA L. LONGORIA Justice
Delivered and filed on the 18th day of January, 2024.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mary Ashley Gomez v. Juan Jose Rojas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mary-ashley-gomez-v-juan-jose-rojas-texapp-2024.