Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Andrea Lynn Martin appealed from the County Court at Law No. 2 of Travis County. The Texas Supreme Court transferred the case from the Third Court of Appeals to the Thirteenth Court of Appeals under a docket-equalization order.
On June 30, 2026, the appellate clerk notified Martin that the briefing schedule had begun. After her brief became overdue, the clerk notified her on August 12, 2026, that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless she provided a reasonable explanation within ten days.
The Court’s Holding
The Thirteenth Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution under Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1) and 42.3(b) and (c). Martin neither reasonably explained her delay in filing the brief nor otherwise responded to the clerk’s notices.
The court also dismissed any pending motions as moot. Justice Clarissa Silva authored the memorandum opinion for a panel consisting of Justices Silva, Peña, and West.
Key Takeaways
- An appellant’s failure to file a brief can support dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.
- The court provided notice of the overdue brief and ten days to submit a reasonable explanation before dismissing the appeal.
- Because the appeal was dismissed, any pending motions were dismissed as moot.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that appellate briefing deadlines and clerk notices require prompt attention. An appellant who neither files a brief nor reasonably explains the delay risks dismissal without consideration of the appeal’s merits.