Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro

Court of Appeals of Texas

Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro

DecidedJune 18, 2001

Docket07-00-00547-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro (Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro) 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

Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro, (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

NO. 07-00-0547-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

JUNE 18, 2001

______________________________

RAYMUND ELIZONDO AND JOSIE ELIZONDO, APPELLANTS

V.

MARIA TORO, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF COCHRAN COUNTY;

NO. 375; HONORABLE JAMES ST. CLAIR, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

In this appeal, appellants Raymund and Josie Elizondo challenge a judgment in favor of appellee Maria Toro. The suit underlying the appeal was a forcible entry and detainer suit brought by appellants against appellee. However, appellee was successful in her counterclaim and recovered a judgment against appellants in the amount of $3,534.70. In its judgment, the trial court provided that appellee could recover the amount either by the free use of certain rental property for a specific number of months, or through the payment by appellants of the difference between the amount owed less $160 for each month appellee had possession of the property after a specified date. For the reasons expressed, we dismiss the appeal.

The clerk’s record was filed in this case on February 6, 2001, and the reporter’s record was filed on February 20, 2001. That being true, appellants’ brief was due to be filed with us not later than March 22, 2001. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). No such brief has been filed.

On May 14, 2001, this court notified appellants that if they did not file a response by May 25, 2001, reasonably explaining their failure to file such a brief, together with a showing that appellee had not been significantly injured because of the failure, their appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). We have received no such response.

Accordingly, this appeal must be, and is hereby, dismissed.

John T. Boyd

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

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

NO. 07-00-0547-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

JUNE 18, 2001

______________________________

RAYMUND ELIZONDO AND JOSIE ELIZONDO, APPELLANTS

V.

MARIA TORO, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF COCHRAN COUNTY;

NO. 375; HONORABLE JAMES ST. CLAIR, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

In this appeal, appellants Raymund and Josie Elizondo challenge a judgment in favor of appellee Maria Toro. The suit underlying the appeal was a forcible entry and detainer suit brought by appellants against appellee. However, appellee was successful in her counterclaim and recovered a judgment against appellants in the amount of $3,534.70. In its judgment, the trial court provided that appellee could recover the amount either by the free use of certain rental property for a specific number of months, or through the payment by appellants of the difference between the amount owed less $160 for each month appellee had possession of the property after a specified date. For the reasons expressed, we dismiss the appeal.

The clerk’s record was filed in this case on February 6, 2001, and the reporter’s record was filed on February 20, 2001. That being true, appellants’ brief was due to be filed with us not later than March 22, 2001. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). No such brief has been filed.

On May 14, 2001, this court notified appellants that if they did not file a response by May 25, 2001, reasonably explaining their failure to file such a brief, together with a showing that appellee had not been significantly injured because of the failure, their appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). We have received no such response.

Accordingly, this appeal must be, and is hereby, dismissed.

John T. Boyd

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Raymund Elizondo and Josie Elizondo v. Maria Toro, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymund-elizondo-and-josie-elizondo-v-maria-toro-texapp-2001.