Sam Murray, as Trustee of the S.H. Murray Trust, and Murray Pecos Ranch, LTD. v. Alamar Ventures, Inc., Cien Once Grazers, LLC and Hondo Davis

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS

SAM MURRAY, AS TRUSTEE OF THE § No. 08-24-00401-CV
S.H. MURRAY TRUST and MURRAY
PECOS RANCH, LTD, § Appeal from the

Appellant, § 83rd Judicial District Court

v. § of Pecos County, Texas

ALAMAR VENTURES, INC., CIEN ONCE § (TC#P-8682-83-CV)
GRAZERS, LLC, and HONDO DAVIS,
§
Appellees.
§

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether it should be

dismissed for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), 37.3(b).

The clerk’s record in this appeal was due on December 14, 2024. 1 On December 17, 2024,

the District Clerk of Pecos County notified this Court that Appellant had not filed a letter of

designation for the clerk’s record. That same day, the Clerk of this Court sent a letter to Appellant

1
Pursuant to Rule 34.5a, an appellant in a civil case may elect to file an appendix in lieu of a clerk’s record if, within
ten days after the notice of appeal is filed, the appellant also files a notice of election with the trial court and with the
court of appeals. Tex. R. App. P. 34.5a(a). Appellant did not file such notice in this Court, and we set the due date for
the clerk’s record pursuant to Rule 35.1. Id. (providing deadlines for filing a clerk’s record in a civil appeal).
notifying him that it appeared he no longer wished to pursue this appeal, as no arrangements had

been made for the preparation of the clerk’s record as required by Rule 35.3(a)(2). Id. 35.3(a)(2).

The letter indicated that this Court would submit this cause for dismissal after 20 days if Appellant

did not make satisfactory arrangements with the District Clerk for preparing the clerk’s record. See

Id. 37.3(b) (authorizing a court of appeals to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution if an

appellant fails to make arrangements with the district clerk for preparing the clerk’s record). On

January 7, 2025, the District Clerk sent a second letter to this Court notifying us that no designation

for the clerk’s record has been received.

As of this date, Appellant has not made satisfactory arrangements for the preparation of

the clerk’s record. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. Id. 37.3(b),

42.3(b).

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

January 15, 2025

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

2