Martinez v. Desilva - Case Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District, dismissed the case of Adam Martinez v. David Desilva for want of prosecution. The dismissal occurred because the appellant failed to file a required brief by the court-ordered deadline.
What changed
The Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District, has dismissed the civil case Adam Martinez v. David Desilva (Docket No. 03-25-00563-CV) for want of prosecution. This action was taken because the appellant failed to file their brief by the original due date of November 13, 2025, and did not respond to the court's notice by the extended deadline of December 22, 2025, nor did they file a motion for an extension.
This dismissal means the appeal has been terminated due to the appellant's lack of action. Legal professionals involved in similar cases should ensure timely filing of all required documents to avoid dismissal. There are no specific compliance deadlines or penalties mentioned beyond the dismissal of the case itself.
What to do next
- Ensure timely filing of all required appellate briefs and motions.
Source document (simplified)
Jump To
Top Caption Disposition Lead Opinion
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
March 6, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
Adam Martinez v. David Desilva
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
- Citations: None known
- Docket Number: 03-25-00563-CV
- Nature of Suit: Forcible entry & detainer
Disposition: Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
Disposition
Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
Lead Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-25-00563-CV
Adam Martinez, Appellant
v.
David Desilva, Appellee
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY
NO. C-1-CV-25-002315, THE HONORABLE TODD T. WONG, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant’s brief was originally due on November 13, 2025. On December 12, 2025,
this Court sent a notice to appellant informing him that his brief was overdue and that a failure to
file a satisfactory response by December 22, 2025 would result in the dismissal of this appeal for
want of prosecution. To date, appellant has not filed a brief or a motion for extension of time.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).
Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Theofanis and Crump
Dismissed for Want of Prosecution
Filed: March 6, 2026
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get State Courts alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Texas Court of Appeals publishes new changes.