Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2000

Gary and Kimberlie Rayburn v. Department of Protective and Regulatory Services

Gary and Kimberlie Rayburn v. Department of Protective and Regulatory Services
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided December 21, 2000

Gary and Kimberlie Rayburn v. Department of Protective and Regulatory Services

Opinion



NUMBER 13-00-362-CV



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

GARY AND KIMBERLIE RAYBURN, Appellants,

v.



DEPARTMENT OF PROTECTIVE AND

REGULATORY SERVICES, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 343rd District Court

of San Patricio County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N



Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and Rodriguez

Opinion Per Curiam



Appellants, GARY AND KIMBERLIE RAYBURN, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 343rd District Court of San Patricio County, Texas, in cause number S-99-5357FL-C. The clerk's record was filed on June 29, 2000. The reporter's record was filed on September 1, 2000. Appellants' brief was due on October 1, 2000. 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 October 17, 2000, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellants were 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 appellants' 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Do not publish.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 21st day of December, 2000

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.