Background
Alexander Markees Barrow and Deanna Zyer Chambers filed a notice of appeal on April 14, 2026. The case reached the Texas Thirteenth Court of Appeals through a docket-equalization transfer from the Third Court of Appeals.
On May 22, 2026, the court clerk notified the appellants that their notice did not comply with several Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and instructed them to file a proper notice within thirty days. After they failed to do so, the clerk sent another notice on July 16 warning that the appeal would be dismissed unless the defects were cured within ten days. The appellants neither amended the notice nor responded.
The Court’s Holding
The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. It relied on Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3, which permits an appellate court, after providing ten days’ notice, to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution or for failure to comply with an appellate rule or a clerk’s directive.
Because the appellants failed to cure their defective notice of appeal despite two notices and did not respond to the clerk, the court concluded that dismissal was warranted. The memorandum opinion did not address the merits of the underlying dispute.
Key Takeaways
- A notice of appeal must satisfy the applicable content, signature, service, and filing requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
- Failure to correct identified appellate-filing defects after notice may result in dismissal for want of prosecution.
- The dismissal was procedural and did not resolve the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that initiating an appeal requires more than filing a document labeled as a notice of appeal. When a clerk identifies defects and sets a deadline to cure them, appellants must respond promptly or risk losing appellate review without a merits decision.