Richard Smith v. Corpus Riversquare I LP

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 24, 2023
Docket13-23-00172-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Richard Smith v. Corpus Riversquare I LP (Richard Smith v. Corpus Riversquare I LP) 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
Richard Smith v. Corpus Riversquare I LP, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-23-00172-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

RICHARD SMITH, Appellant,

v.

CORPUS RIVERSQUARE I LP, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Tijerina, Silva, and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

Appellant filed a notice of appeal on May 3, 2023. On May 12, 2023, the Clerk of

the Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal was defective and did not comply

with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b), 9.5(e), 25.1(d), and 25.1(e) and that a

$205.00 filing fee was due. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5, 25.1 On June 9, 2023, the Clerk of this Court again notified appellant that the appeal

was subject to dismissal if a filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of the

notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c). On July 28, 2023, the Clerk of this Court again

notified appellant of the defects in his notice of appeal; the Clerk of the Court notified

appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal if the defects were not corrected, or the

filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of receipt of the letter. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

On August 7, 2023, each of the clerk’s notices were returned undeliverable and

marked “return to sender” and “not deliverable as addressed” and “unable to forward.”

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign

any document filed and “give the party’s mailing address, telephone number, fax number,

if any, and email address.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.1(b). The clerk’s office does not have a

telephone number for appellant, and the district clerk did not have any additional contact

information for the appellant.

Furthermore, Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 permits an appellate court,

on its own initiative after giving ten days’ notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for

want of prosecution or for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules. See

id. 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3.

JAIME TIJERINA Justice

Delivered and filed on the 24th day of August, 2023.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Richard Smith v. Corpus Riversquare I LP, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-smith-v-corpus-riversquare-i-lp-texapp-2023.