Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2010

in the Interest of R. E. S., III, J.D.S. and A.E.S., Children

in the Interest of R. E. S., III, J.D.S. and A.E.S., Children
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided August 24, 2010

in the Interest of R. E. S., III, J.D.S. and A.E.S., Children

Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                      NUMBERS 13-10-00394-CV

 

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

 

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________

 

IN THE INTEREST OF R.E.S., III, J.D.S. AND A.E.S., CHILDREN

____________________________________________________________

 

                            On appeal from the 36th District Court

                                   of San Patricio County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

 

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

                  Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 


Appellant, R.S.[1], perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas, in cause number S-09-5052-FL-A.  On June 15, 2010, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due on March 5, 2010, and that the deputy district clerk, Ernestina Roblez, 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 notices. 

The Court, having considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.  See id. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c).  Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.  Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.                                 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

24th day of August, 2010.

 

 

 



[1] In appeals from cases involving the termination of parental rights, the rules of appellate procedure require the use of an alias to refer to a minor, Aand if necessary to protect the minor=s identity, to the minor=s parent or other family member.”  Tex. R. App. P. 9.8.

 

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