Kenneth Murray Locke v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services--Appeal from 119th District Court of Tom Green County

Annotate this Case
NUMBER 13-06-322-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

 

KENNETH MURRAY LOCKE, Appellant,

 
v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND

PROTECTIVE SERVICES, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

 
On appeal from the 119th District Court
of Tom Green County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Ya ez and Garza
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, KENNETH MURRAY LOCKE, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 119th District Court of Tom Green County, Texas, in cause number B-04-120-CPS. No clerk's record has been filed due to appellant's failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record.

If the trial court clerk fails to file the clerk's record because the appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

On August 7, 2006, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record, this Court's notice, and appellant's failure to respond, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

 

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 14th day of September, 2006.

 

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.