Opinion
NUMBER 13-12-00419-CV
08-23-2012
JOSE L. SOTO, Appellant, v. CITY OF EDINBURG, TEXAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 7
of Hidalgo County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Jose L. Soto, attempted to perfect an appeal from an order entered by the County Court at Law No. 7 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause no. CL-05-2304-G. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that the order from which this appeal was taken was not a final appealable order. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court's notice.
Additionally, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5(e). See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5(e). The Clerk directed appellant to file an amended notice of appeal with the district clerk's office within 30 days from the date of that notice. To date, the defect has not been corrected.
An appellate court may dismiss a civil appeal 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(c). The Court, having considered the documents on file, and appellant's failure to correct the defects, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 37.3, 42.3(a),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction and failure to comply with a notice from the Court. See id.
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 23rd day of August, 2012.