Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2011

Todd Phillippi v. State

Todd Phillippi v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided August 3, 2011

Todd Phillippi v. State

Opinion

 

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

 

No. 10-10-00347-CR

No. 10-10-00348-CR

 

Todd Phillippi,

                                                                                    Appellant

 v.

 

The State of Texas,

                                                                                    Appellee

 

 


From the County Court at Law

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 05-C-3702 and 05-C-3707

 

MEMORANDUM  Opinion

 

The briefs in these appeals were originally due to be filed by February 4, 2011.  When no briefs were filed, a late brief notice was sent to appellant, Todd Phillippi, on February 15, 2011.  Twenty days later, Phillippi’s motion for extension of time to file his briefs was filed.  The Court granted an extension of time to file the briefs to June 20, 2011.  No briefs were filed for Phillippi.

By letter dated June 30, 2011, the Clerk of this Court notified Phillippi that pursuant to Rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Court would dismiss these appeals for want of prosecution unless, within 21 days of the date of the letter, a brief was filed in each of these appeals.  Phillippi was further warned that if no briefs were filed by 5:00 p.m. on July 21, 2011, these appeals would be dismissed.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).  No briefs were filed by the 5:00 p.m. deadline.

Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed.

 

                                                                        TOM GRAY

                                                                        Chief Justice

 

Before Chief Justice Gray,

            Justice Davis, and

            Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed August 3, 2011

Do not publish

[CV06]

ual’s pleadings; (3) granting Hodges’s motion to sever Liberty Mutual’s and his claims against Performance Contracting from the remainder of the claims in the suit; and (4) granting Hodges’s motion to withdraw $235,758.67 from the court’s registry. After the severance, Liberty Mutual and Raytheon perfected this appeal, stating their intention to seek appellate review of each of these orders.

      The clerk’s record was filed in this Court on December 31, 2002. No reporter’s record was filed because Liberty Mutual and Raytheon failed to request preparation of the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c)(2). After giving Liberty Mutual and Raytheon opportunity to request preparation of the record (which they failed to do), the Clerk of this Court notified Liberty Mutual and Raytheon by letter dated March 26, 2003 that an appellant’s brief, “presenting issues determinable from the clerk’s record alone,” was due thirty days thereafter (April 25). Id. To date, no appellant’s brief has been filed.

      Appellate Rule 38.8(a)(1) provides that if an appellant fails to timely file a brief, 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.


Id. 38.8(a)(1).

      The Clerk of this Court sent the following notice to Liberty Mutual and Raytheon on May 8, 2003:

Pursuant to Rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, you are notified that the Court may dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution unless, within ten days of this letter, the appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal files with this court a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.


Id. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3. The Court has received no response. Id. 42.3, 38.8(a)(1). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Id. 38.8(a)(1).

 

                                                                   PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Gray

Dismissed for want of prosecution

Opinion delivered and filed June 4, 2003

[CV06]

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