Tijerina, Noe, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Maria Flores A/K/A Maria Flores De Ojeda and as Next Friend of Joshua and Jennifer Tijerina, Minor Child v. Garcia, Samuel, M.D., and McAllen Medical Center, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 19, 2001
• Docket: 13-00-00354-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-00-354-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

NOE TIJERINA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE

ESTATE OF MARIA FLORES A/K/A MARIA FLORES DE OJEDA AND AS

NEXT FRIEND OF JOSHUA AND JENNIFER TIJERINA, MINOR CHILDREN , Appellant,

v.

SAMUEL GARCIA, M.D., ET AL. , Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 206th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Justices Dorsey, Yañez, and Castillo

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, NOE TIJERINA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARIA FLORES A/K/A MARIA FLORES DE OJEDA AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF JOSHUA AND JENNIFER TIJERINA, MINOR CHILDREN , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 206th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-802-98-D . The clerk's record was filed on June 9, 2000 . The reporter's record was filed on December 7, 2000 . Appellant's brief was due on March 15, 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 April 24, 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, 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

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 19^th day of July, 2001