Patrick B. Smith v. James D. Easley, et al.--Appeal from 52nd District Court of Coryell County
Annotate this CaseIN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-96-135-CV
PATRICK B. SMITH,
Appellant
v.
JAMES D. EASLEY, ET AL.,
Appellees
From the 52nd District Court
Coryell County, Texas
Trial Court # 29,035
MEMORANDUM OPINION
At the close of Patrick Smith's case in chief, the court granted James Easley and his co-defendants' motion for an instructed verdict. Tex. R. Civ. P. 269. Smith filed a "motion of appeal" on May 20, 1996, and the transcript was filed in this court on June 21. Although his brief was due on July 22, no appellant's brief has been filed. Tex. R. App. P. 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 twenty-five days have passed since Smith's brief was due. We notified him of this defect by letter on August 8. 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. Id. 60(a)(2), 74(l)(1). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. 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 30, 1996
Do not publish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.