Richard Steven Senter, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of R.M. Senter, Deceased, et al. v. R.M. Senter, III and Donald F. Senter and the Matter of the Guardianship of Edith Meier Senter, et al.--Appeal from 87th District Court of Freestone County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-96-117-CV

RICHARD STEVEN SENTER, INDIVIDUALLY

AND AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF R.M. SENTER,

DECEASED, ET AL.,

Appellants

v.

R.M. SENTER, III AND DONALD F. SENTER

AND THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF EDITH

MEIER SENTER, ET AL.,

Appellees

From the 77th District Court

Freestone County, Texas

Trial Court # 95-029-A

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Richard Senter appeals from the court's denial of his motion for a summary judgment. The transcript was filed in this court on June 10, 1996. Tex. R. App. P. 54(a). Although his brief was due on July 10, no appellant's brief has been filed. Id. 74(k). Appellate Rule 74(l)(1) provides:

Civil Cases. In civil cases, when the appellant has failed to file his brief in the time prescribed, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless reasonable explanation is shown for such failure and that appellee has not suffered material injury thereby. The court may, however, decline to dismiss the appeal, whereupon it shall give such direction to the cause as it may deem proper.

Id. 74(l)(1).

More than thirty days have passed since Senter's brief was due. We notified him of this defect by letter on July 18. Id. 60(a)(2), 83. He has not responded to our letter showing grounds for continuing the appeal nor has he provided a reasonable explanation for failing to file a brief. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosection. Id. 74(l)(1).

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Cummings, and

Justice Vance

Dismissed for want of prosecution

Opinion delivered and filed August 14, 1996

Do not publish