Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank

Court of Appeals of Texas

Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank

DecidedFebruary 14, 2002

Docket13-01-00426-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank (Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank) 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

Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank, (Tex. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-01-426-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

________________________________________________________________

SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , Appellant,

v.

PROVIDIAN NATIONAL BANK , Appellee.

________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Yañez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-34,955-D . The clerk's record was filed on June 27, 2001 . The reporter's record was filed on September 26, 2001 . Appellant's brief was due on October 26, 2001 . 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 November 19, 2001, 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, appellants' 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

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 14^th day of February, 2002.

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

NUMBER 13-01-426-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

________________________________________________________________

SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , Appellant,

v.

PROVIDIAN NATIONAL BANK , Appellee.

________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Yañez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-34,955-D . The clerk's record was filed on June 27, 2001 . The reporter's record was filed on September 26, 2001 . Appellant's brief was due on October 26, 2001 . 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 November 19, 2001, 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, appellants' 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

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 14^th day of February, 2002.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Sooncha Bernal A/K/A Soon Cha Bernal v. Providian National Bank, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sooncha-bernal-aka-soon-cha-bernal-v-providian-nat-texapp-2002.