Virley-Leroy Session v. Riata Land Association Homeowners, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 21, 2024
• Docket: 04-22-00562-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-22-00562-CV

Virley-Leroy SESSION, Appellant

v.

RIATA LAND ASSOCIATION HOMEOWNERS, INC., Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 21-2100-CV-E Honorable Heather H. Wright, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios Justice Beth Watkins, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 21, 2024

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

Appellant’s brief was originally due on October 6, 2023. However, neither the brief nor a

motion for extension of time was filed. Instead, on October 10, 2023, appellant filed a

“Jurisdictional Challenge,” which did not comply with the briefing requirements in Texas Rules

of Appellate Procedure 9.4 or 38.1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.4, 38.1. We therefore ordered appellant

to file by November 6, 2023, his brief and a written response reasonably explaining his failure to

timely file a brief and why appellee was not significantly injured by appellant’s failure to timely

file a brief. 04-22-00562-CV

On November 6, 2023, appellant filed a “Petition for a Writ of Mandamus,” which we

construed as his appellant’s brief. The filing, however, did not comply with the briefing

requirements in Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.1(c), (g), (h), (i), and (k). See TEX. R. APP.

P. 38.1. We therefore ordered appellant’s brief stricken and ordered appellant to file an amended

brief by December 5, 2023.

Appellant did not file an amended brief, and on December 18, 2023, we ordered appellant

to file, by January 2, 2024, his amended brief and a written response reasonably explaining his

failure to timely file an amended brief. In our order, we cautioned appellant if he failed to timely

file an amended brief and written response, we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a); see also id. R. 42.3(c). Appellant did not respond to our order.

Accordingly, because appellant has failed to comply with our order by filing an amended brief, we

dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a); see also id. R. 42.3(c).

-2-