Narrative Opinion Summary
The appeal, numbered 13-06-00663-CV, involves Michael Grant Sanders as the appellant and Malia Mako Pome'e Sanders as the appellee, originating from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. The appellant's brief was due on August 13, 2008. On September 23, 2008, the court notified the appellant that the brief had not been filed and warned that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1) unless the appellant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay within ten days and demonstrated that the appellee had not been significantly harmed by the absence of the brief. The appellant did not respond to this notification, failing to explain the failure to file a brief, request an extension, or submit the brief. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, citing Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a) and 42.3(b). The memorandum opinion was delivered and filed on December 4, 2008.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences of Failure to Respond to Court Notificationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's failure to respond to the court's notification regarding the missing brief resulted in the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.
Reasoning: The appellant did not respond to this notification, failing to explain the failure to file a brief, request an extension, or submit the brief. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, citing Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a) and 42.3(b).
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to file the required brief by the deadline and did not provide a reasonable explanation for the delay or demonstrate that the appellee was not significantly harmed.
Reasoning: The court notified the appellant that the brief had not been filed and warned that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1) unless the appellant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay within ten days and demonstrated that the appellee had not been significantly harmed by the absence of the brief.