Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution because the appellant failed to pay or arrange payment of the clerk’s fee and did not respond to the court’s notice. The court noted that the appellant had not established eligibility to proceed without payment of costs under the applicable Texas rules.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution when the clerk's record was not filed because the appellant failed to pay or arrange payment of the clerk's preparation fee and failed to demonstrate entitlement to proceed without costs.
Holdings
- When a trial-court clerk fails to file the clerk's record because an appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's preparation fee, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Because appellant did not pay, make arrangements to pay, respond to the court's notice, or establish entitlement to proceed without costs, dismissal was proper.
Key quotations
“If a trial-court clerk fails to file the clerk’s record due to an appellant’s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay for the clerk’s fee for preparing the record, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs.” (2)
“Because appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the clerk’s record, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.” (2)
Factual background
The appellate record was not filed because appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the trial clerk's fee for preparing the clerk's record. After receiving notice and an opportunity to cure the problem by filing a status report, appellant neither responded nor established that she was entitled to proceed without payment of costs.
Procedural history
The clerk's record was due on September 19, 2025. After the record was not filed, the court notified appellant on September 23, 2025, that she needed to arrange payment and file a status report by October 3, 2025, warning that noncompliance could result in dismissal. Appellant did not respond, did not establish indigence or entitlement to proceed without costs, and the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.