Guadalupe Atkinson and Jesus Atkinson v. Ana Maria Hernandez, Individually and as Dependent of the Estate of Rogerio Atkinson A/K/A Roy Atkinson
Guadalupe Atkinson and Jesus Atkinson v. Ana Maria Hernandez, Individually and as Dependent of the Estate of Rogerio Atkinson A/K/A Roy Atkinson
Opinion
NUMBER 13-13-000035-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ GUADALUPE ATKINSON AND JESUS ATKINSON, Appellants, v. ANA MARIA HERNANDEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS DEPENDENT EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF ROGERIO ATKINSON A/K/A ROY ATKINSON Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam This matter is before the Court on a defective notice of appeal and appellants’ failure to correct the defect. On January 29, 2013, the Court advised appellants that the notice of appeal was not in compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(d)(5) and advised them to correct the defects. On March 6, 2013, the Court again advised appellants that the notice of appeal was not in compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(d)(5) and requested correction of these defects within ten days. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.5, 25.1(d)(5), 37.1, 42.3(b),(c). Appellants were advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defects were not cured after the expiration of ten days from the date of receipt of the Court's notice. Appellants have failed to correct the defects or otherwise respond to the Court's notices.
On its own motion, with ten days notice to the parties, an appellate court may dismiss a civil appeal for want of prosecution for failure to comply with a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION for failure to comply with a notice from the Court. See id.
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 9th day of May, 2013.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.