From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zaragoza v. Prcn. Tools

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Feb 3, 2011
No. 13-10-00575-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 3, 2011)

Opinion

No. 13-10-00575-CV

Delivered and filed February 3, 2011.

On Appeal from the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

Before Justices GARZA, BENAVIDES, and VELA.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Appellant, Miguel Zaragoza, appealed judgments entered by the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. On October 22, 2010, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5, 25.1. The Clerk directed appellant to file an amended notice of appeal with the district clerk's office within thirty days from the date of that notice.

On December 9, 2010, the Court again advised appellant that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, specifically rules 9.5(e), 25.1(d)(2), and 25.1(d)(7). The Clerk notified appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if the defects were not cured after the expiration of ten days from the date of receipt of the Court's notice. Appellant has failed to correct the defects or otherwise respond to the Court's notices.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct these defects, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.


Summaries of

Zaragoza v. Prcn. Tools

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Feb 3, 2011
No. 13-10-00575-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 3, 2011)
Case details for

Zaragoza v. Prcn. Tools

Case Details

Full title:MIGUEL ZARAGOZA, APPELLANT, v. PRECISION TOOLS AND CHESAPEAKE, APPELLEES

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg

Date published: Feb 3, 2011

Citations

No. 13-10-00575-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 3, 2011)