Marcus Blalock v. Tyler Price Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 of Bell County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-18-00082-CV Marcus Blalock, Appellant v. Tyler Price, Appellee FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF BELL COUNTY NO. 80966, THE HONORABLE JEANNE PARKER, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant’s brief was originally due on May 29, 2018. After this Court sent a notice advising appellant that his brief was overdue, appellant submitted a brief on July 12, which was received, not filed, because it was not timely filed or accompanied by a motion for extension of time and it failed to comply with the rules of appellate procedure. We notified appellant of various specific deficiencies and requested that he resubmit a compliant brief accompanied by a motion for extension of time on or before July 19, 2018. In August, we sent two additional notices that a compliant brief was overdue. After receiving a “motion for extension of time to file petition for review,” which we construed as a motion for extension of time to file a corrected brief and then granted, the Court advised appellant that no further extensions would be granted. Appellant subsequently resubmitted the same non-compliant brief, with the sole addition being a form titled “Judgement [sic] in a Civil Action” that appellant appears to have filled in with the judgment amount he hoped to recover. None of the previously identified deficiencies were addressed by appellant’s latest filing. The Court has provided multiple opportunities and a lengthy period of time for appellant to file a brief that is compliant with the appellate rules, and to date, appellant has failed to do so. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). __________________________________________ Jeff Rose, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Field and Toth Dismissed for Want of Prosecution Filed: October 11, 2018 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.
