












 
 
 
 
 
 
                             NUMBER13-06-046-CV
 
                         COURT OF APPEALS
 
               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
__________________________________________________________________
 
SCOTT
P. OGLE,                                                     Appellant,
 
                                           v.
 
BONILLA,
OGLE & PERSCHBACH, ET AL.,                    Appellees.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                  On appeal from the 319th
District Court
                           of Nueces
County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
              Before Justices
Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza
                       Memorandum Opinion Per
Curiam
 




Appellant, SCOTT
P. OGLE, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the   319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 02-2429-G.  The clerk=s record was filed on January 26,
2006.  No reporter=s record was filed.  Appellant=s brief was due on February 27, 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
17, 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 1st day of June, 2006
 
 
 

