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