IN THE INTEREST OF R. E. S., III, J.D.S. AND A.E.S., CHILDREN--Appeal from 36th District Court of San Patricio County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBERS 13-10-00394-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ___________________________________________________________ IN THE INTEREST OF R.E.S., III, J.D.S. AND A.E.S., CHILDREN ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, R.S.1, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas, in cause number S-09-5052-FL-A. On June 15, 2010, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was originally due on March 5, 2010, and that the deputy district clerk, Ernestina Roblez, had notified this Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the 1 In appeals from cases involving the termination of parental rights, the rules of appellate procedure require the use of an alias to refer to a minor, Aand if necessary to protect the minor=s identity, to the minor=s parent or other family member. Tex. R. App. P. 9.8. 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. Appellant failed to respond to the Court=s notices. The Court, having considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot. PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 24th day of August, 2010. 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.
