Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2008

Diana Nori Diaz, D.D.S. v. Patterson Dental Supply, Inc.

Diana Nori Diaz, D.D.S. v. Patterson Dental Supply, Inc.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 17, 2008

Diana Nori Diaz, D.D.S. v. Patterson Dental Supply, Inc.

Opinion











NUMBER 13-07-681-CV



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

DIANA N. DIAZ, D.D.S., Appellant,



v.



PATTERSON DENTAL SUPPLY, INC., Appellee.

_____________________________________________________________



On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas

______________________________________________________________



MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam



Appellant, Diana N. Diaz, D.D.S., appealed a summary judgment rendered against her in favor of appellee, Patterson Dental Supply, Inc., in County Court at Law No. 3 of Cameron County, Texas. On November 6, 2007, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due that same day, and that Veronica Deaton, the Deputy District Clerk of Cameron County, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellant failed to respond to the Court's notice. Appellant has further failed to pay required fees as directed by the Clerk of this Court.

The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to comply with the requirements of the appellate rules and failure to respond to the Court's notices, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 17th day of April, 2008.









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