Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2004

in the Matter of the Marriage of Giancarlo Martinez and Cynthia Jean v. Martinez

in the Matter of the Marriage of Giancarlo Martinez and Cynthia Jean v. Martinez
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided March 25, 2004

in the Matter of the Marriage of Giancarlo Martinez and Cynthia Jean v. Martinez

Opinion






NUMBER 13-03-148-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________________________________


IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF GIANCARLO MARTINEZ

AND CYNTHIA JEAN MARTINEZ

__________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the County Court at Law

of Kleberg County, Texas.

__________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, GIANCARLO MARTINEZ, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law of Kleberg County, Texas, in cause number 01-398-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 February 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.

         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 25th day of March, 2004.



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