Breckenridge Property Fund 2016, LLC v. Claudia v. MacHani Kumar L MacHani ( 2020 )

Opinion issued March 24, 2020 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-19-00528-CV ——————————— KUMAR L. MACHANI, Appellant V. BRECKENRIDGE PROPERTY FUND 2016, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 4 Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 19-CCV-065124 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Kumar L. Machani, filed his notice of appeal from the trial court’s July 17, 2019 judgment for possession in favor of appellee, Breckenridge Property Fund 2016, LLC. The clerk’s record was filed on August 27, 2019, and the reporter’s record was filed on October 16, 2019. Appellant’s brief, therefore, was due on November 15, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellant failed to timely file a brief. On November 18, 2019, this Court issued a notice to appellant that his time to file a brief had expired, notifying appellant that, within 10 days of the notice, he must file a motion requesting an extension of time along with his brief, or a motion to extend the deadline to file his brief. Appellant was further advised that failure to do so could result in a dismissal for want of prosecution. Appellant failed to submit any filing by the extended December 2, 2019 deadline set by the Court. On December 17, 2019, appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a) (governing failure of appellant to file brief); 42.3(b) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case). On January 9, 2020, this Court denied appellee’s motion, because it failed to include the required certificate of conference. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5). The Court further ordered appellant to file a brief and a motion requesting an extension of time within 15 days of the date of the order, notifying appellant that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. Appellant again failed to submit any filing by the extended January 24, 2020 deadline. On February 21, 2020, appellee filed its second motion to dismiss for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). Appellee’s second motion to dismiss included the required certificate of conference, certifying that counsel for 2 appellee made a reasonable attempt to confer with appellant regarding the merits of the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5). More than ten days have passed, and appellant has not responded to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a). Accordingly, we grant appellee’s motion and dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, failure to file a brief, and failure to comply with an order of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Landau, and Countiss. 3