Keith Thomas v. Sherry Dickinson ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • Opinion filed June 21, 2012

     

                                                                           In The

                                                                                 

      Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                       __________

     

                                                             No. 11-11-00244-CV

                                                        __________

     

                                          KEITH THOMAS, Appellant

         

    V.

     

    SHERRY DICKINSON ET AL., Appellees

     

     

                                       On Appeal from the 259th District Court

     

                                                                 Jones County, Texas

     

                                                         Trial Court Cause No. 022488

     

     

                                                M E M O R A N D U M    O P I N I O N

                This is an appeal from a final judgment signed on July 13, 2011.  We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

    The clerk’s record and the reporter’s record were filed in this court on April 9, 2012.   Appellant, Keith Thomas, was notified by a written letter dated April 13, 2012, that his brief was due for filing on or before May 14, 2012. Appellant did not file his brief on or before May 14, 2012.  On May 29, 2012, the clerk of this court advised appellant in writing that his brief was past due. The clerk further informed appellant that, on its own motion, the court had granted him an extension until June 13, 2012, to file his brief.  The clerk’s letter of May 29, 2012, further advised appellant that the failure to file his brief by June 13, 2012, might result in his appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8 and 42.  There has been no response to the clerk’s letter of May 29, 2012.

    The failure to timely file appellant’s brief appears to be due to appellant’s acts and omissions.  Therefore, pursuant to Rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b), the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

     

                                                                                        PER CURIAM

     

    June 21, 2012

    Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

    McCall, J., and Kalenak, J.

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-11-00244-CV

Filed Date: 6/21/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/16/2015