SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL v. PROVIDIAN NATIONAL BANK--Appeal from County Court at Law No 4 of Hidalgo County
Annotate this CaseNUMBER 13-01-426-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
________________________________________________________________
SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , Appellant,
v.
PROVIDIAN NATIONAL BANK , Appellee.
________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4
of Hidalgo County, Texas.
________________________________________________________________
O P I N I O N
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Ya ez
Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, SOONCHA BERNAL A/K/A SOON CHA BERNAL , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-34,955-D . The clerk's record was filed on June 27, 2001 . The reporter's record was filed on September 26, 2001 . Appellant's brief was due on October 26, 2001 . To date, no appellate brief has been received.
When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).
On November 19, 2001, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no response has been received.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants' failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, and appellant's failure to respond, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.
Opinion delivered and filed
this the 14th day of February, 2002.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.