ROBERT SCHOENMAKERS AND JAMES SCHOENMAKERS v. SPARKMAN WELL SERVICE, INC. AND STEVEN JOSEPH MOZISEK--Appeal from 135th District Court of Refugio County

Annotate this Case
NUMBER 13-07-313-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________

 

ROBERT SCHOENMAKERS, ET AL., Appellants,

 
v.

SPARKMAN WELL SERVICE, INC., ET AL., Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

 
On appeal from the 135th District Court
of Refugio County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellants, ROBERT SCHOENMAKERS, ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 135th District Court of Refugio County, Texas, in cause number 2004-6-9846. No clerk's record has been filed due to appellants' failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record.

If the trial court clerk fails to file the clerk's record because the appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

On August 14, 2007, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellants were given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellants.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellants' failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record, this Court's notice, and appellants' 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 4th day of October, 2007.

 

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.