Keith Thomas v. Sherry Dickinson

Opinion filed June 21, 2012

 

                                                                       In The

                                                                             

  Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                   __________

 

                                                         No. 11-11-00244-CV

                                                    __________

 

                                      KEITH THOMAS, Appellant

     

                                                             V.

 

                            SHERRY DICKINSON ET AL., Appellees

 

 

                                   On Appeal from the 259th District Court

 

                                                             Jones County, Texas

 

                                                     Trial Court Cause No. 022488

 

 

                                            M E M O R A N D U M    O P I N I O N

            This is an appeal from a final judgment signed on July 13, 2011.  We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

The clerk’s record and the reporter’s record were filed in this court on April 9, 2012.   Appellant, Keith Thomas, was notified by a written letter dated April 13, 2012, that his brief was due for filing on or before May 14, 2012.  Appellant did not file his brief on or before May 14, 2012.  On May 29, 2012, the clerk of this court advised appellant in writing that his brief was past due.  The clerk further informed appellant that, on its own motion, the court had granted him an extension until June 13, 2012, to file his brief.  The clerk’s letter of May 29, 2012, further advised appellant that the failure to file his brief by June 13, 2012, might result in his appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8 and 42.  There has been no response to the clerk’s letter of May 29, 2012. 

The failure to timely file appellant’s brief appears to be due to appellant’s acts and omissions.  Therefore, pursuant to Rules 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b), the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.

 

                                                                                    PER CURIAM

 

June 21, 2012

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Kalenak, J.