Suresh Kumar Mynam v. Sunkara Sowmya and Sreedhar Dasi
This text of Suresh Kumar Mynam v. Sunkara Sowmya and Sreedhar Dasi (Suresh Kumar Mynam v. Sunkara Sowmya and Sreedhar Dasi) 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
NUMBER 13-25-00197-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
SURESH KUMAR MYNAM, Appellant,
v.
SUNKARA SOWMYA AND SREEDHAR DASI, Appellees. ____________________________________________________________
ON APPEAL FROM THE 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Silva, Peña, and Cron Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña This matter is before the Court on its own motion. 1 On March 10, 2025, appellant
filed a notice of appeal. On the same date, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that
the filing party must serve a copy of the document on all parties. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5.
1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Third Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. On April 23, 2025, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal was
not in compliance with Texas Rules of Appellant Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e). See id. R.
9.5, 25.1(e). Appellant was notified that if a proper notice of appeal was not filed within
thirty days, the matter would be referred to the Court. Again, on June 3, 2025, the Clerk
of the Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal was not in compliance with Texas
Rules of Appellant Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e). See id. Appellant was further notified that
if the defects were not cured within ten days, the appeal would be dismissed. See id. R.
42.3(b), c).
Appellant has failed to correct the defects in his notice of appeal and has otherwise
not responded to the notices from the Clerk of the Court requiring a response or other
action within the time specified; accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of
prosecution. See id.
L. ARON PEÑA JR. Justice
Delivered and filed on the 31st day of July, 2025.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Suresh Kumar Mynam v. Sunkara Sowmya and Sreedhar Dasi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suresh-kumar-mynam-v-sunkara-sowmya-and-sreedhar-dasi-texapp-2025.