Rafael Gurrusqueita Vega, d/b/a Restaurante y Taqueria Altamirano v. Harris County et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued December 13, 2012 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-11-00834-CV RAFAEL GURRUSQUEITA VEGA D/B/A RESTAURANTE Y TAQUERIA ALTAMIRANO, Appellant V. HARRIS COUNTY, ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND THE HARRIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, THE HARRIS COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, AND THE HARRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT; CITY OF HOUSTON; HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; AND HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, Appellees On Appeal from the 270th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010-59315 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Rafael Gurrusqueita Vega d/b/a Restaurante y Taqueria Altamirano, perfected an appeal from the trial court s judgment entered on August 30, 2011. On July 26, 2012, the court reporter informed this Court that no reporter s record exists in this case. The trial court clerk filed the clerk s record on August 14, 2012. On August 30, 2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant, at his address in the George J. Beto Facility, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Tennessee Colony, Texas, that, because no reporter s record exists, his brief was due on October 1, 2012. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). The Court s letter was returned, and the Court was informed that appellant had been discharged and had left no forwarding address. On October 22, 2012, after appellant failed to timely file a brief, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that he had failed to timely file a brief and that failure to file a brief and motion for extension by November 12, 2012 could lead to dismissal of this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). This letter was also returned, because appellant had been discharged and left no forwarding address. Accordingly, because appellant has neither filed a brief nor responded to the Court s notice, and appellant has not provided us with any other address or means of contacting him, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a); 42.3(b). We dismiss any pending motions as moot. 2 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Sharp. 3
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.
