LETTY ROBINSON D/B/A CELLULAR SOLUTIONS v. CBL/SUNRISE MALL, L. P.--Appeal from 103rd District Court of Cameron County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-08-00446-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ______________________________________________________________ LETTY ROBINSON D/B/A CELLULAR SOLUTIONS, Appellant, v. CBL/SUNRISE MALL, L. P., Appellee. _____________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 103rd District Court of Cameron County, Texas. ______________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Letty Robinson d/b/a Cellular Solutions, perfected an appeal from a judgment rendered against her in favor of appellee, CBL/Sunrise Mall, L.P.. On August 13, 2008, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due on August 12, 2008, and that the deputy district clerk, Christina Tusa, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX . R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. On August 13, 2008, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that she was delinquent in remitting a $175.00 filing fee. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal if the filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter. See id. 42.3(b),(c). Appellant has failed to failed to respond to this Court s notices and has failed to pay the filing fee. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX . R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). PER CURIAM Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this the 6th day of November, 2008. 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.
