NO. 12-24-00020-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS CHARLES STEWART, § APPEAL FROM THE APPELLANT V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 ADDISON O’NEIL/AG MORRIS HOLDINGS, § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS APPELLEE MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b).

Charles Stewart filed his pro se notice of appeal on February 8, 2024. The clerk’s record was filed on February 29, the reporter’s record was filed on April 1, and Stewart’s brief was due on or before May 1. On May 13, this Court notified Appellant that his brief was past due. We further notified Appellant that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution unless a motion for extension of time, containing a reasonable explanation for the failure to file a brief and showing that Appellee has not suffered material injury thereby, is filed no later than May 17.

Stewart filed a motion for extension of time, which this Court granted to July 8. On July 17, this Court again notified Appellant that his brief was past due. We further notified Appellant that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution unless a motion for extension of time, containing a reasonable explanation for the failure to file a brief and showing that Appellee has not suffered material injury thereby, is filed no later than July 29.

This deadline expired and Appellant did not file a brief, a motion for extension of time, or other response to this Court’s notice. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

Opinion delivered August 29, 2024.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT AUGUST 29, 2024

NO. 12-24-00020-CV

CHARLES STEWART, Appellant V. ADDISON O’NEIL/AG MORRIS HOLDINGS, Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 76,290-A)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that the appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of prosecution; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.