Steeplechase Condominium Owners Association, Inc., F/U/B Daniel A. Bass v. State Farm Lloyds--Appeal from 73rd Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Annotate this CaseNo. 04-00-00177-CV
STEEPLECHASE CONDOMINIUM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
f/u/b Daniel A. Bass,
Appellant
v.
STATE FARM LLOYDS,
Appellee
From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1997-CI-08939
Honorable David A. Berchelmann, Jr., Judge Presiding
Per Curiam
Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice
Alma L. Lopez, Justice
Catherine Stone, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 20, 2000
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION
On July 31, 2000, this Court issued a show cause order, giving the appellant ten days to provide written proof that (1) appellant requested the official reporter to prepare the reporter=s record pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(b); and (2) the check given to the reporter was sufficient to pay the reporter=s fee; or (3) appellant was entitled to appeal without paying the reporter=s fee. The July 31 order also stated that, if appellant failed to respond within the time provided, appellant=s brief would be due within thirty (30) days from the date of the order and the Court would only consider those issues or points raised in appellant=s brief that did not require a reporter=s record for a decision. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c).
The appellant has not complied with the July 31 order. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time have been filed. On September 18, 2000, the appellee filed a motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution. The appellee=s motion was held in abeyance, giving appellant fifteen days from October 24, 2000 to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a).
The appellant has not complied with the October 24 order. The appellee=s motion is granted. The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Costs of appeal are taxed against appellant.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
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.