In the Interest of J. M. W., a child Appeal from 87th District Court of Anderson County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-17-00020-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS § APPEAL FROM THE 87TH § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS IN THE INTEREST OF J. M. W., A CHILD MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. Pursuant to Rule 32.1, Appellant’s docketing statement was due to have been filed at the time the appeal was perfected, i.e., January 10, 2017. On January 10, 2017, this Court requested that Appellant file a docketing statement within ten days if he had not already done so. Appellant did not file the docketing statement as requested. On January 24, this Court issued a second notice advising Appellant that the docketing statement was past due. The notice further provided that unless the docketing statement was filed on or before February 3, the appeal would be presented for dismissal in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3. The date for filing the docketing statement has passed, and Appellant has not complied with the Court’s request. Because Appellant has failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 32.1, the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Opinion delivered February 15, 2017. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J. (PUBLISH) COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT FEBRUARY 15, 2017 NO. 12-17-00020-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J. M. W., A CHILD, Appeal from the 87th District Court of Anderson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 87-10495) THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed; and that the 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.
