Mustafa Engin Derkunt v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline
Opinion
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________
No. 07-12-0461-CV ________________________
MUSTAFA E. DERKUNT, APPELLANT
V.
COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the 261st District Court Travis County, Texas Trial Court No. D-1-GN-11-000745, Honorable Donald Kraemer, Presiding
April 5, 2013
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Quinn, C.J., and Campbell and Pirtle, JJ.
The brief of pro se appellant Mustafa Engin Derkunt was due for filing on
February 25, 2013. When the brief was not filed, we notified Derkunt by letter of March
4, 2013, that pursuant to appellate rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b) the appeal was subject
to dismissal without further notice unless he filed his brief, along with a motion
requesting additional time, by March 14, 2013. We have received from Derkunt neither a brief, a motion for additional time nor any other response to our March 4 letter.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1)
& 42.3(b). As Derkunt appears in the case as an indigent, no costs are assessed.
Per Curiam
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mustafa Engin Derkunt v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline (Mustafa Engin Derkunt v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.