Christian Stover and Merissa Stover v. John Font and Amy Font Appeal from County Court at Law No 2 of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-17-00425-CV ____________________ CHRISTIAN STOVER AND MERISSA STOVER, Appellants V. JOHN FONT AND AMY FONT, Appellees _______________________________________________________ ______________ On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 16-05-05575-CV ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court signed a final judgment on August 21, 2017. Christian Stover and Merissa Stover, appellants, filed a notice of appeal but failed to file a brief. On September 24, 2018, we notified the parties that appellants had received a final extension for their brief, that appellants’ brief was past due and had not been filed, and we warned appellants that the appeal would be submitted on the record alone unless we received a brief and motion for extension of time by October 4, 2018. On October 10, 2018, having received no response to the late brief notice, we notified 1 the parties that the appeal would be submitted to the Court on October 31, 2018, without briefs and without oral argument. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.8. If an appellant fails to timely file a brief, the appellate 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. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). In this case, appellants failed to assign error for appellate review by filing a brief. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). APPEAL DISMISSED. ________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on October 31, 2018 Opinion Delivered November 15, 2018 Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ. 2
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.
