MARK BRADFORD v. BOWIE CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Texarkana.

MARK BRADFORD, Appellant v. BOWIE CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee

No. 06-16-00081-CV

Decided: March 23, 2017

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Mark Bradford filed a timely notice of appeal on October 27, 2016. The clerk's record was filed January 18, 2017, and the reporter's record was filed December 19, 2016. On January 5, 2017, this Court received a document from Bradford purporting to be his brief in this matter. By letter dated January 19, 2017, this Court advised Bradford that the document he submitted was not filed because it failed to meet the requirements of Rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. The January 19 letter explained, in detail, the requirements of Rule 38.1 and specifically advised Bradford how his brief failed to comply with the Rule. The letter further informed Bradford that the deadline for filing a brief that complied with Rule 38.1 had been extended to February 21, 2017. Finally, we warned Bradford in the letter that his failure to file a compliant brief by February 21, 2017, would subject this appeal to dismissal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).

We have received no responsive communication from Bradford and have not received his appellate brief.1 Having not received any response to this Court's letter of January 19, 2017, Bradford's appeal is ripe for dismissal for want of prosecution.

Consequently, pursuant to Rules 38.8 and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c).

FOOTNOTES

1.   Bradford filed a motion for the appointment of counsel on February 13, 2017. That motion was overruled on February 22, 2017.

Ralph K. Burgess Justice