Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2006

in the Interest of Travis James Dillon Warren, a Minor Child

in the Interest of Travis James Dillon Warren, a Minor Child
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided January 26, 2006

in the Interest of Travis James Dillon Warren, a Minor Child

Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                             

 

 

NUMBER 13-03-449-CV

 

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

 

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

 

 

IN THE INTEREST OF TRAVIS JAMES DILLON WARREN,

A MINOR CHILD,

____________________________________________________________

 

                              On appeal from the 36th District Court

                                        of Aransas County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

 

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

         Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Yañez

                                 Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellants, James Warren and Lynn Warren, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 36th District Court of Aransas County, Texas, in cause number A-93-0285-CV-A.  No clerk=s record has been filed due to appellants= 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).

Notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).  Appellants were given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed.  Appellants responded to this Court=s notice; however, said response fails to establish that appellants are entitled to proceed without payment of costs.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file,  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 26th day of January, 2006.

 

 

 

 

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