Roberto Alonzo v. Aluminum Company of America
This text of Roberto Alonzo v. Aluminum Company of America (Roberto Alonzo v. Aluminum Company of America) 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.
Opinion
|
|
NUMBER13-04-505-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
__________________________________________________________________
ROBERT ALONZO, ET AL., Appellants,
v.
ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA, ET AL., Appellees.
__________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 117th District Court
of Nueces County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellants, ROBERT ALONZO, ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 04-3812-H. The clerk=s record was filed on August 25, 2005. No reporter=s record was filed. Appellants= brief was due on November 10, 2005. 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 January 6, 2006, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellants were 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, appellants= failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and appellants= 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
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed
this the 2nd day of March, 2006.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Roberto Alonzo v. Aluminum Company of America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberto-alonzo-v-aluminum-company-of-america-texapp-2006.