Ruben Mendez and Wife Nora Mendez A/K/A Nora Elia Mendez v. A.L. Lee Honea, Ined and D/B/A Springfield Consulting and Construction

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 30, 2006
• Docket: 13-05-00533-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

                             NUMBER13-05-533-CV

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________________________________

RUBEN MENDEZ, ET AL.,                                         Appellants,

                                           v.

A. L. LEE HONEA, ET AL.,                                         Appellees.

__________________________________________________________________

                  On appeal from the 92nd District Court

                           of Hidalgo County, Texas.

__________________________________________________________________

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

                Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, RUBEN MENDEZ, ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the  92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-847-03-A.  The clerk=s record was filed on September 29, 2005.  No reporter=s record was filed.  Appellant=s brief was due on February 14, 2006.  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 March 1, 2006, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellant was 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, appellant=s failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and appellant=s 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 30th day of March, 2006