In the Matter of the Estate of Thelma Pauline Taylor Erwin, Deceased Appeal from County Court of Henderson County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-14-00244-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE § APPEAL FROM THE OF THELMA PAULINE TAYLOR § COUNTY COURT OF ERWIN, DECEASED § HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). Appellant’s brief was due on June 22, 2015. However, Appellant did not file a brief on that date. On June 23, 2015, this court notified Appellant that her brief was past due. Appellant was warned that the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution unless, on or before July 3, 2015, she filed a motion for extension of time to file the brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(c). Appellant also was informed that the motion must include a reasonable explanation for her failure to timely file her brief and show that Appellee has not suffered significant injury thereby. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1). To date, Appellant has not filed a brief or a motion for extension of time. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). Opinion delivered July 8, 2015. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J. (PUBLISH) COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT JULY 8, 2015 NO. 12-14-00244-CV IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THELMA PAULINE TAYLOR ERWIN, DECEASED Appeal from the County Court of Henderson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 28-2014) THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of prosecution; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
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.
