Opinion
NUMBER 13-14-00349-CV
09-11-2014
STEVEN PATRICK JONES, JOHN PATRICK ACORD, ECOENERGY GROUP, INC., AND INTERMODAL WEALTH, INC. Appellants, v. LYDIA TUMMEL, KURT K. TUMMEL TRUST, AND HAROLD K. TUMMEL, Appellees.
On appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
The appellants' brief in the above cause was due on July 28, 2014. On July 29, 2014, appellees, Lydia Tummel, Harold K. Tummel individually and as trustee of the Kurt K. Tummel Trust, filed a motion to dismiss this appeal on grounds that appellants had not timely filed their brief in this cause in accordance with this Court's directive. On August 20, 2014, the Clerk of the Court notified appellants that their briefs had not been timely filed and that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter, appellants reasonably explained the failure and the appellees were not significantly injured by the appellants' failure to timely file their briefs. On September 4, 2014, the Court received a pro se response from John Acord, in which he stated that he had only recently been informed that his counsel had withdrawn and that he was incarcerated without access to the record. Acord requested: (1) an extension of sixty days "in which to file an appeal," or "to stay the appeal until the related criminal case is completed," (2) a free copy of the appellate record in this case; and (3) to proceed as an indigent. To date, no response has been received from the other appellants.
The clerk's record in this case was filed on December 27, 2013. The reporter's record was filed on February 14, 2014. A supplemental clerk's record was filed on March 18, 2014. Appellants' counsel was allowed to withdraw on June 26, 2014. While Acord has attempted to offer a reasonable explanation regarding his failure to timely file a brief, the remaining appellants have not. Neither Acord nor the remaining appellants have argued or established that the appellees have not been significantly injured by the appellants' failure to timely file a brief. The underlying judgment is a monetary judgment in favor of appellants and that judgment has not been superseded. Accordingly, we GRANT appellees' motion to dismiss and this appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). All relief requested in Acord's pro se motion is DENIED.
PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 11th day of September, 2014.