Pedro Chay, Mario Soto and David Bonito v. Penske Truck Leasing Company, L.P. and Peter Johnson

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided August 30, 2018·No. 01-18-00646-CV·Published

Opinion

Opinion issued August 30, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00646-CV ——————————— PEDRO CHAY, MARIO SOTO, AND DAVID BONITO, Appellants V. PENSKE TRUCK LEASING COMPANY, L.P. AND PETER JOHNSON, Appellees

On Appeal from the 190th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2017-64561

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Pedro Chay, Mario Soto, and David Bonito, have neither

established indigence for purposes of appellate costs nor arranged to pay the fee for

preparing the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145, TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellants did not adequately

respond. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id. 37.3(b),

42.3(b), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Lloyd.

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

Pedro Chay, Mario Soto and David Bonito v. Penske Truck Leasing Company, L.P. and Peter Johnson, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Pedro Chay, Mario Soto and David Bonito v. Penske Truck Leasing Company, L.P. and Peter Johnson (Pedro Chay, Mario Soto and David Bonito v. Penske Truck Leasing Company, L.P. and Peter Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.