Michael Gay Cook v. Caroline D. Cook Appeal from County Court at Law of Rockwall County (memorandum opinion by chief justice iii morriss)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-16-00002-CV MICHAEL GAY COOK, Appellant V. CAROLINE D. COOK, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court No. CI15-070 Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION Michael Gay Cook timely filed a notice of appeal December 7, 2015.1 The clerk’s record was filed December 8, 2015. The reporter’s record was filed December 21, 2015. Cook’s brief was due to be filed in this Court on January 20, 2016. When neither a brief nor a motion to extend time for filing same was received by January 20, this Court advised Cook by letter dated February 10, 2016, that the brief was late. We further extended the deadline for filing the brief to February 25, 2016. We warned Cook that failure to file the brief by February 25, 2016, would subject this appeal to dismissal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c). We have received no responsive communication from Cook and have not received his appellate brief. Having received no response to this Court’s letter of February 10, 2016, Cook’s appeal is ripe for dismissal for want of prosecution. Consequently, pursuant to Rules 38.8 and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See id. Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: March 15, 2016 March 16, 2016 1 Originally appealed to the Fifth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to Section 73.001 of the Texas Government Code. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2013). We are unaware of any conflict between precedent of the Fifth Court of Appeals and that of this Court on any relevant issue. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3. 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.
