From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hills v. Bell Cnty. Law Enforcement

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Jan 20, 2012
NO. 03-11-00487-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2012)

Opinion

NO. 03-11-00487-CV

01-20-2012

Elderidge Vanderhorst Hills, Appellant v. Bell County Law Enforcement, et al., Appellees


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 169TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 251,569-B, HONORABLE GORDON G. ADAMS, JUDGE PRESIDING


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Elderidge Vanderhorst Hills had filed a pro se notice of appeal from the district court's order dismissing his case after finding that his Petition did not comply with Chapter 14 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.003 (West 2002). Appellant's brief was due in this Court on October 26, 2011, and is overdue. If an appellant fails to file a brief, this Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and appellee is not significantly injured by that failure. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). On November 15, 2011, we sent notice to appellant that his brief was overdue and that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution if appellant did not submit a proper motion to this Court on or before November 28, 2011. To date, no brief or motion for extension of time has been filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

Bob Pemberton, Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose Dismissed for Want of Prosecution


Summaries of

Hills v. Bell Cnty. Law Enforcement

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Jan 20, 2012
NO. 03-11-00487-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2012)
Case details for

Hills v. Bell Cnty. Law Enforcement

Case Details

Full title:Elderidge Vanderhorst Hills, Appellant v. Bell County Law Enforcement, et…

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Jan 20, 2012

Citations

NO. 03-11-00487-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 20, 2012)