NUMBER 13-11-00269-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
IN THE INTEREST OF T.M., A CHILD
___________________________________________________________
On appeal from the County Court at Law
of Aransas County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, J.L.1, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at
Law of Aransas County, Texas, in cause number A-10-7127-FL. On June 22, 2011, the
Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the clerk's record in the above cause was
originally due on June 20, 2011, and that the district clerk, Pam Heard, had notified this
1
In appeals from cases involving the termination of parental rights, the rules of appellate procedure require
the use of an alias to refer to a minor, Aand if necessary to protect the minor’s identity, to the minor’s parent
or other family member.” Tex. R. App. P. 9.8.
Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record. The
Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct
the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Appellant was
advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this
notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution.
On October 13, 2011, the Clerk of this Court again notified appellant that the
clerk's record had not been filed and that the district clerk, Pam Heard, had notified this
Court that appellant failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk's record.
Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date
of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. The
notice was sent to appellant’s address by certified mail return receipt requested; however,
the certified mail was returned as unclaimed and unable to forward. Subsequently, the
Clerk of the Court sent the notice to appellant by regular mail on October 27, 2011.
Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s notices. Accordingly, the appeal is
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
15th day of December, 2011.
2