Opinion
No. 05-07-01335-CV
Opinion Filed August 7, 2009.
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-06-18143-A.
Before Justices WRIGHT, O'NEILL, and LANG.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Resurgence Financial, L.L.C. appeals the trial court's order dismissing its case for want of prosecution. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court erred in failing to grant its default judgment because it submitted adequate evidence of liability and liquidated damages. We affirm.
Appellant specifically frames its issue as "In the context of a Motion for No-Answer Default Judgment on liquidated damages, is a party required to submit evidence of liability beyond the pleadings (and the attached documents) and prove its case as if it moved for a traditional summary judgment?"
We begin by addressing the state of the appellate record in this case. The following documents are not contained in the appellate record, and there is nothing in the record demonstrating that Resurgence requested these documents be included in the record: the trial court's rule 165a letter referenced in the dismissal order, and the request for preparation of the clerk's record.
Although Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a) places the burden to timely prepare, file, and certify the clerk's record with the trial court clerk, the appellant bears the burden to bring forward an appellate record that enables this Court to determine whether the appellant's complaints constitute reversible error. See Enter. Leasing of Houston v. Barrios, 156 S.W.3d 547, 549 (Tex. 2004); Resurgence Fin., L.L.C. v. Moseley, 05-07-01225-CV, 2009 WL 92444 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). The dismissal order cites two reasons for dismissal: (1) failure to take action after notice of intent to dismiss for want of prosecution (IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 165A LETTER) and (2) dismiss for want of prosecution. Where, as here, the issues on appeal necessarily involve consideration of documents omitted from the appellate record, namely, the rule 165a letter, we must presume the missing document supports the trial court's order of dismissal. We resolve Resurgence's sole issue against it.
We affirm the trial court's order dismissing the case for want of prosecution.