Carol Ann Benningfield v. Michael Ostos, Dana Ostos and Hartford Casualty Insurance Company--Appeal from 347th District Court of Nueces County

Annotate this Case
/**/

NUMBER 13-05-127-CV

 

COURT OF APPEALS

 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

 

CAROL ANN BENNINGFIELD, Appellant,

 

v.

 

MICHAEL OSTOS, DANA OSTOS, AND HARTFORD

CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellees.

___________________________________________________________________

 

On appeal from the 347th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Before Justices Ya ez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellant, CAROL ANN BENNINGFIELD, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 347th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 02-155-H. The clerk s record was filed on February 17, 2005. No reporter s record was filed. Appellant s brief was due on March 21, 2005. 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 April 25, 2005, 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, appellant s 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

 

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 26th day of May, 2005

 

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.