Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety

Court of Appeals of Texas

Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety

DecidedOctober 21, 2004

Docket13-04-00112-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety (Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety) 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

Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-04-112-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

TEOFILO NORBERTO FLORES, Appellant,

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, TEOFILO NORBERTO FLORES, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by County Court at Law No. 3 of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2003-CCL-852-C. No clerk’s record has been filed due to appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record.

If the trial court clerk fails to file the clerk’s record because the appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

On June 23, 2004, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, appellant’s failure to respond to this Court’s notice, and appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 21st day of October, 2004.

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

NUMBER 13-04-112-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

TEOFILO NORBERTO FLORES, Appellant,

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, TEOFILO NORBERTO FLORES, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by County Court at Law No. 3 of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2003-CCL-852-C. No clerk’s record has been filed due to appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record.

If the trial court clerk fails to file the clerk’s record because the appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

On June 23, 2004, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, appellant’s failure to respond to this Court’s notice, and appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 21st day of October, 2004.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Teofilo Norberto Flores v. Texas Department of Public Safety, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teofilo-norberto-flores-v-texas-department-of-publ-texapp-2004.