Opinion
NO. 12-11-00403-CV
01-18-2012
CLEVELAND WADE THOMPSON, APPELLANT v. SMITH COUNTY, APPELLEE
APPEAL FROM THE 7TH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The trial court signed an order of dismissal on December 8, 2011. On December 19, 2011, Appellant Cleveland Wade Thompson filed a notice of appeal that failed to contain the information required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e), i.e., a certificate of service showing service on all parties to the trial court's judgment.
On December 21, 2011, Thompson was notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.1 that the notice of appeal was defective for failure to comply with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e). He was further notified that unless he filed a "proper" notice of appeal on or before January 20, 2012, the appeal would be referred to the court for dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Thompson responded to this court's notice asserting that the lack of a certificate of service is not a proper ground for dismissal. Therefore, he has not corrected his defective notice of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c); Feist v. Berg, No. 12-04-00004-CV, 2004 WL 252785, at *1 (Tex. App.-Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied); Feist v. Hubert, No. 12-03-00442-CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Tex. App.-Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied). Opinion delivered January 18, 2012. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
(PUBLISH)
CLEVELAND WADE THOMPSON, Appellant
V.
SMITH COUNTY, Appellee
Appeal from the 7th Judicial District Court
of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 11-3216-A)
THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that the motion be granted and the appeal be dismissed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.