Alexander Markees Barrow and Deanna Zyer Chambers v. Vijay Kumar Sangram
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 13th District
Date FiledAugust 13, 2026
Docket13-26-00410-CV
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
NUMBER 13-26-00410-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
ALEXANDER MARKEES BARROW
AND DEANNA ZYER CHAMBERS, Appellants,
v.
VIJAY KUMAR SANGRAM, Appellee.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 5
OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices Silva and Cron
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Tijerina
On April 14, 2026, appellants filed a notice of appeal. 1 On May 22, 2026, the Clerk
of the Court notified appellants that the notice of appeal did not comply with the Texas
1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Third Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket-
equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See Tex Gov’t Code §§ 22.220(a) (delineating
the jurisdiction of appellate courts), 73.001 (granting the supreme court the authority to transfer cases from
Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b), 9.5, 25.1(d)(2, 8), and 25.1(e). See TEX. R. APP. P.
9.1(b), 9.5, 25.1(d), (2), (8), (e). The appellants were informed to file a proper notice of
appeal within thirty days. The appellants failed to file an amended notice of appeal. On
July 16, 2026, the Clerk of the Court again notified appellants that a compliant notice of
appeal had not been filed, and the Clerk further notified appellants that if the defects were
not cured within ten days from the notice, the appeal shall be dismissed. See id. R. 42.3.
To date, appellants have failed to file an amended notice of appeal and have failed to
respond to the clerk’s notices.
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 permits an appellate court, on its own
initiative after giving ten days’ notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for want of
prosecution or for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules or notice
from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See id. R.
42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.
JAIME TIJERINA
Chief Justice
Delivered and filed on the
13th day of August, 2026.
one court of appeals to another at any time that there is “good cause” for the transfer).
2