Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes

Court of Appeals of Texas

Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes

DecidedDecember 21, 2000

Docket13-99-00622-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes (Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes) 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

Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes, (Tex. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-99-622-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

L. LEE PEDRAZA

, Appellant,

v.

CROSSROADS SECURITY AGENCY, ET AL.

, Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and Rodriguez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, L. LEE PEDRAZA, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas, in cause number 95-1-47,510-D. The clerk's record was filed on January 3, 2000. The reporter's record was filed on January 11, 2000. Appellant's brief was due on September 12, 2000. To date, no appellate brief has been received.

When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

On November 13, 2000, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no response has been received.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, and appellant's failure to respond, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 21^st day of December, 2000

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

NUMBER 13-99-622-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

L. LEE PEDRAZA

, Appellant,

v.

CROSSROADS SECURITY AGENCY, ET AL.

, Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and Rodriguez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, L. LEE PEDRAZA, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas, in cause number 95-1-47,510-D. The clerk's record was filed on January 3, 2000. The reporter's record was filed on January 11, 2000. Appellant's brief was due on September 12, 2000. To date, no appellate brief has been received.

When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

On November 13, 2000, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no response has been received.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, and appellant's failure to respond, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 21^st day of December, 2000

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Pedraza, L. Lee v. Crossroads Security Agency, Betty Marrufo and Fidel Puentes, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pedraza-l-lee-v-crossroads-security-agency-betty-m-texapp-2000.