From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Moore

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
Sep 27, 2012
NO. 02-12-00290-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 27, 2012)

Opinion

NO. 02-12-00290-CV

09-27-2012

DANIEL RAY MOORE APPELLANT v. SARAH ELIZABETH MOORE APPELLEE


FROM THE 231ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

On September 6, 2012, we notified appellant that the trial court clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the court that payment arrangements had not been made to pay for the clerk's record as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2). We stated that we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless appellant, within ten days, made arrangements to pay for the clerk's record and provided this court with proof of payment.

Because appellant has not made payment arrangements for the clerk's record, it is the opinion of the court that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b).

Appellant shall pay all costs of the appeal, for which let execution issue.

PER CURIAM PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.


Summaries of

Moore v. Moore

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
Sep 27, 2012
NO. 02-12-00290-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 27, 2012)
Case details for

Moore v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL RAY MOORE APPELLANT v. SARAH ELIZABETH MOORE APPELLEE

Court:COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

Date published: Sep 27, 2012

Citations

NO. 02-12-00290-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 27, 2012)