Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2012

Eugene Williams v. Marcelina Williams

Eugene Williams v. Marcelina Williams
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided August 2, 2012

Eugene Williams v. Marcelina Williams

Opinion

02-12-091-CV


COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

 

 

 

NO. 02-12-00091-CV

 

 

Eugene Williams

 

APPELLANT

 

V.

 

Marcelina Williams

 

APPELLEE

 

 

------------

 

FROM THE 393rd District Court OF Denton COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION[1] AND JUDGMENT

------------

 

On May 23, 2012, after filing appellant’s brief, we issued a letter to appellant stating that his brief failed to comply with several of the rules of appellate procedure as well as local rule 1.A(8).  We asked him to file an amended brief by June 4, 2012, and warned him that failure to do so could result in striking his brief, waiver of noncomplying points, or dismissal of the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3.

On June 27, 2012, we notified appellant that his amended brief had not been filed as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a).  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a).  We stated that we could dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court within ten days a response reasonably explaining the failure to timely file an amended brief.  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3.

We have not received any response from appellant.  Therefore, we strike appellant’s original brief as noncompliant with the rules of appellate procedure and our local rule, and because appellant has not filed an amended brief, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.  See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

 

PER CURIAM

 

PANEL:  MCCOY, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

 

DELIVERED:  August 2, 2012


 



[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

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