ROBERTO MORENO v. CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, ET AL.--Appeal from 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County

NUMBER 13-01-667-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

________________________________________________________________

ROBERTO MORENO , Appellant,

v.

CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AND RED SIMPSON, INC. , Appellees.

________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 92nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ROBERTO MORENO , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 92nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-4544-98-A . The clerk's record was filed on September 21, 2001 . The reporter's record was filed on December 23, 2002 . Appellant's brief was due on April 21, 2003 . To date, no appellate brief has been received.

When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the 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. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

On April 28, 2003, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no response has been received. Appellees have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court's notice, appellant's failure to respond, and appellees' motion to dismiss, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellees' motion to dismiss for want of prosecution is GRANTED. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 5th day of June, 2003