MAREY N. GARCIA MYERS MAYO v. ELIZABETH H. COATES MADDUX, ET AL.--Appeal from 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County

NUMBER 13-02-509-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________________

MAREY N. GARCIA MAYO , Appellant,

v.

ELIZABETH COATES MADDUX, ET AL. , Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 332nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Ya ez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, MAREY N. GARCIA MAYO , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-6239-95-F . The clerk's record was filed on September 25, 2002 . No reporter's record was filed . Appellant's brief was due on October 25, 2002 . To date, appellant has failed to file a proper appellate brief.

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 February 10, 2003, 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. Appellant has filed a motion for extension of time to file brief. Appellees have filed a an opposition to appellant's motion. Appellees request that this Court deny appellant's motion on the grounds that appellant has not given a reasonable explanation for failure to timely file as required by the rules. Appellees have also filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, appellant's motion for extension of time to file brief, appellees' response, and appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellant's motion for extension of time to file brief is DENIED. Appellees' motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 10th day of April, 2003