Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2006

Martin R. Rodriguez v. Joe Jackson, Constance Henson and Paul Eaglin

Martin R. Rodriguez v. Joe Jackson, Constance Henson and Paul Eaglin
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided July 27, 2006

Martin R. Rodriguez v. Joe Jackson, Constance Henson and Paul Eaglin

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-06-046 CV

____________________



MARTIN R. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant



V.



JOE JACKSON, CONSTANCE HENSON AND PAUL EAGLIN, Appellees




On Appeal from the 58th District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. A-163381




MEMORANDUM OPINION

On May 18, 2006, we notified the parties that the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution unless arrangements were made for filing the record or the appellant explained why he needed time for filing the record. Appellant did not respond. The appellant is not entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. There being no satisfactory explanation for the failure to file the record, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Costs are assessed against appellant.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

____________________________

STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice



Opinion Delivered July 27, 2006

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.

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