Michael Goodall v. Stat Care EMS

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-07-401 CV

____________________



MICHAEL GOODALL, Appellant



V.



STAT CARE EMS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 58th District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. A-177,376




MEMORANDUM OPINION

The brief of the appellant, Michael Goodall, was initially due on November 21, 2007. The Court granted two extensions of time to file the brief, the second motion being granted over the objection of the appellee. On January 4, 2008, we granted the appellant's motion for extension of time for filing the brief but informed the parties that the extension granted was a final extension. The appellant did not file his brief by the January 20, 2008 deadline, and we notified the parties that the appeal would be submitted without briefs unless we received both the brief and a motion for extension of time within ten days. On January 28, 2008, the appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. (1) The appellees allege the appellant failed to prosecute his appeal. The appellant did not directly respond to the appellee's motion, but requested an additional sixty days to file his brief. The appellant makes a general statement that he faces unspecified "health problems" and eviction, but provides no supporting evidence for his assertions. On February 8, 2008, we warned the appellant that his appeal would be dismissed unless we received his brief by March 17, 2008.

There being no satisfactory explanation for the appellant's failure to timely file the brief, the appellee's motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1); Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). Costs are assessed against appellant.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

____________________________

HOLLIS HORTON

Justice



Opinion Delivered March 27, 2008

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.

1. Although titled "Appellee's Motion to Dismiss Goodall's Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction" the motion is more accurately described as a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution.