












 
 
 
 
 
 
                             NUMBER13-05-533-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
__________________________________________________________________
 
RUBEN
MENDEZ, ET AL.,                                         Appellants,
 
                                           v.
 
A. L.
LEE HONEA, ET AL.,                                         Appellees.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                  On appeal from the 92nd
District Court
                           of Hidalgo
County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
                Before Justices Hinojosa,
Yañez, and Garza
                       Memorandum Opinion Per
Curiam
 




Appellants, RUBEN MENDEZ, ET AL., perfected an appeal from a judgment entered
by the  92nd District
Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number C-847-03-A.  The clerk=s record was filed on September 29,
2005.  No reporter=s record was filed.  Appellant=s brief was due on February 14, 2006.  To date,
no appellate brief has been received.
When the appellant has
failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal
for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and
the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant=s failure to timely
file a brief.  Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).
On March
1, 2006, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to
dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).  Appellant was given ten days to explain why
the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief.  To date, no response has been received.
The Court, having
examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to file a
proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and
appellant=s failure to respond,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of
prosecution.  The appeal is hereby
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.
PER CURIAM
 
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed
this the 30th day of March, 2006
 
 
 

