From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Donohue v. Donohue

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
May 29, 2014
No. 04-14-00265-CV (Tex. App. May. 29, 2014)

Opinion

No. 04-14-00265-CV

05-29-2014

John DONOHUE, Appellant v. Martha DONOHUE, Appellee


From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CI19573

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding


ORDER

On April 21, 2014, appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's October 8, 2013 judgment. On May 13, 2014, appellant filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs in this court. Appellant did not file his affidavit in the trial court. We construed the affidavit filed in this court as a motion for extension of time to file the affidavit in the trial court. Although the affidavit was filed outside the fifteen-day deadline set forth in Rule 20.1(3), an untimely affidavit of indigence can be "adequate to fulfill the fundamental purpose of Rule 20.1." Higgins v. Randall County Sheriff's Office, 257 S.W.3d 684 (Tex. 2008). Accordingly, we granted the motion to extend time to file an affidavit of inability to pay costs.

A motion to extension of time to file the notice of appeal is pending. This court is waiting for the clerk's record to be filed prior to ruling on the extension.

As a result, we ordered the clerk of this court to send copies of the affidavit and this order to the district clerk, the court reporter, and all parties. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(d)(2). We further ordered that if the clerk or the court reporter intended to file a contest to the affidavit of indigence, they were required to file such contest in this court on or before May 27, 2014. No contest was filed. Accordingly, in the absence of a contest, appellant is presumed indigent.

On May 23, 2014, the district clerk filed a notice of late record in which she stated the clerk's record was not filed because appellant had not paid for the record and was not entitled to the record without payment. This is now incorrect given that no contest has been filed. As noted above, appellant is now presumed indigent, and therefore, appellant is entitled to both the clerk's record and the reporter's record without payment for same.

Accordingly, we ORDER the district clerk to file the clerk's record in this court on or before July 1, 2014. We remind the clerk appellant is entitled to the record without payment for same.

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on all parties, all counsel, the district clerk, and the court reporter.

__________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 29th day of May, 2014.

__________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court


Summaries of

Donohue v. Donohue

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
May 29, 2014
No. 04-14-00265-CV (Tex. App. May. 29, 2014)
Case details for

Donohue v. Donohue

Case Details

Full title:John DONOHUE, Appellant v. Martha DONOHUE, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: May 29, 2014

Citations

No. 04-14-00265-CV (Tex. App. May. 29, 2014)