Pamela Manning v. Charles Randall Cothes, Individually and D/B/A McDonald's of Beeville, McDonald's #6798, McDonalds Corp. 042/0323 Appeal from 36th District Court of Bee County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-16-00425-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ PAMELA MANNING, Appellant, v. CHARLES RANDALL COTHES, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A MCDONALD'S OF BEEVILLE, MCDONALD'S #6798, MCDONALDS CORP. 042/0323, Appellees. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 36th District Court of Bee County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Garza, Perkes, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam The appellant’s brief in the above cause was due on September 19, 2016. On October 3, 2016, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the brief had not been timely filed and that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not significantly injured by the appellant’s failure to timely file a brief. To date, no response has been received from appellant. Appellant has failed to either reasonably explain the failure to file a brief, file a motion for extension of time to file the brief, or file the brief. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b)(c). PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 10th day of November, 2016. 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.
