Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2005

Dred W. Martin v. William T. Oliver, D.D.S. and William T. Oliver, D.D.S., Inc.

Dred W. Martin v. William T. Oliver, D.D.S. and William T. Oliver, D.D.S., Inc.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 7, 2005

Dred W. Martin v. William T. Oliver, D.D.S. and William T. Oliver, D.D.S., Inc.

Opinion







NUMBER 13-04-431-CV


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________________


DRED W. MARTIN,                                                           Appellant,


v.


WILLIAM T. OLIVER, D.D.S. AND WILLIAM T.

OLIVER, D.D.S., INC.,                                                       Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 2nd 25th District Court

of Gonzales County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, DRED W. MARTIN, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 2nd 25th District Court of Gonzales County, Texas, in cause number 21,983. The clerk’s record was filed on August 16, 2004. The reporter’s record was filed on November 18,2004 and January 10, 2005. Appellant’s brief was due on February 9, 2005. 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 March 8, 2005, 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


Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 7th day of April, 2005



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