Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2004

Calbert Seeds Corporation v. Agripro Seeds, Inc.

Calbert Seeds Corporation v. Agripro Seeds, Inc.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 1, 2004

Calbert Seeds Corporation v. Agripro Seeds, Inc.

Opinion







NUMBER 13-04-036-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________


CALBERT SEEDS CORPORATION,                                       Appellant,


v.


AGRIPRO SEEDS, INC.,                                                      Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 357th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, CALBERT SEEDS CORPORATION, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 357th District Court of Cameron County, Texas, in cause number 2002-02-828-E. 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 February 17, 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.

         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, 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


Opinion delivered and filed

this the 1st day of April, 2004.



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