Sliger v. Rodriguez

Full title: Daniel Alan Sliger, Appellant v. Audra Renee Rodriguez, Appellee

Court: TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Apr 20, 2016

NO. 03-16-00200-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 20, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 03-16-00200-CV

04-20-2016

Daniel Alan Sliger, Appellant v. Audra Renee Rodriguez, Appellee

PER CURIAM

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 250TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-FM-13-003895, HONORABLE SCOTT H. JENKINS, JUDGE PRESIDINGORDER

PER CURIAM

Appellant Daniel Alan Sliger has filed a motion challenging the district court's order sustaining a contest to his affidavit of indigence.¹ Having reviewed the motion and the record from the hearing on the contest, we cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion in sustaining the contest.² Accordingly, we deny appellant's motion.³

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(j)(1).

2 See Higgins v. Randall County Sheriff's Office, 257 S.W.3d 684, 686 (Tex. 2008) ("If the affidavit is contested, the burden is on the applicant to prove indigence by a preponderance of the evidence."); Basaldua v. Hadden, 298 S.W.3d 238, 241 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2009, no pet.) (per curiam) (abuse of discretion in sustaining contest to indigence occurs "only when the trial court acts without reference to any guiding rules or principles or in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner"); see also Kastner v. Texas Bd. of Law Examiners, No. 03-08-00515-CV, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 6381, at *5-10 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 12, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.) (applying abuse-of-discretion standard to review of trial court's order sustaining contest to indigence).

3 See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(j)(4). --------

It is ordered on April 20, 2016. Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Bourland