Joyce Ellison-Harris; And Alandus Weaver v. Rowlon Weaver, Jr.

Opinion filed July 31, 2025

In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-25-00007-CV __________ JOYCE ELLISON-HARRIS AND ALANDUS WEAVER, Appellants V. ROWLON WEAVER, JR., Appellee

On Appeal from the 13th District Court Navarro County, Texas1 Trial Court Cause No. D22-30790-CV

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellants, Joyce Ellison-Harris and Alandus Weaver, appealed from the trial court’s order determining the percentage of interest each party had in two parcels of

This appeal was transferred to this court from the Tenth Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West Supp. 2024). We decide this case in accordance with the precedent of the Tenth Court of Appeals under the principles of stare decisis. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3. land (the property). The trial court ordered that the property be sold at an open market sale and designated a real estate broker if the parties could not agree to one.

On May 20, 2025, we informed Appellants by letter that their brief was due in this court on or before June 20, 2025. On June 30, we notified the parties by letter that Appellants’ brief was overdue in this cause and that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution if a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal was not filed within twenty-one days of the date of the letter. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b); Mathis v. TxTag, No. 10-23-00136-CV, 2023 WL 8827124, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco Dec. 21, 2023, no pet.) (mem. op.).

As of this date, Appellants have not filed a brief. Based upon Appellants’ failure to prosecute this appeal in a timely manner, we conclude that this appeal should be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c); Mathis, 2023 WL 8827124, at *1.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. We dismiss Appellee’s motion to dismiss2 as moot.

JOHN M. BAILEY CHIEF JUSTICE

July 31, 2025 Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

We note that we requested a response from Appellants when Appellee filed his motion to dismiss this appeal. Appellants did not file a response despite two reminders that a motion to dismiss was filed.