Opinion
No. 04-14-00707-CV
03-25-2015
Melissa BROQUET and John Broquet, Appellants v. WALTER MORTGAGE COMPANY, Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION
From the 229th Judicial District Court, Duval County, Texas
Trial Court No. DC-12-60-A
Honorable Robert Blackmon, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Jason Pulliam, Justice DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
Appellants' initial brief was due to be filed December 8, 2014. After two 30-day extensions, Appellants filed their initial brief on February 6, 2015. Appellants were cautioned that no further extension of time would be granted; however, because the initial brief violated Rule 38 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this court ordered that the brief be stricken and ordered appellants to file an amended brief on or before March 2, 2015. Appellants filed a first amended brief. The first amended brief still violated Rule 38 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure because the Statement of Facts and Argument Sections did not contain appropriate citations to the record and the brief referenced and attached evidence not presented to the trial court and not part of the appellate record. This court, again, struck the first amended brief and ordered appellants to file a second amended brief on or before March 17, 2015. Appellants were cautioned that if the brief failed to satisfy Rule 38, it would be stricken, and the appeal dismissed. Appellants, now, file another motion for extension of time to allow a newly-hired attorney time to review the record and file a brief. Appellee filed an objection and opposition to any more extensions.
Because appellants' brief is already over 100 days past due, appellants were cautioned that no further extensions of time will be granted and the brief must conform to the appellate rules by March 17, 2015, and because appellants have been given numerous opportunities to file a conforming brief, this court must deny this third motion for extension of time. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3.
It is ORDERED that appellants' motion for extension of time is DENIED. The appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution. Costs of appeal are taxed against appellants.
PER CURIAM