From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Jul 7, 2016
NO. 01-16-00207-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 01-16-00207-CV

07-07-2016

PROPHET RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, Appellant v. CLEAR LAKE NISSAN AND SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Appellees


On Appeal from the 333rd District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2015-22666

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, proceeding pro se, has neither paid the required filing fee nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1; see also TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041(1) (West Supp. 2015), § 101.0411 (West Supp. 2015); Order, Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). Further, appellant has neither paid nor made arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk's record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). After being notified by the Court's Order and Notice of Intent to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution, issued on April 26, 2016, that this appeal was subject to dismissal for failure to pay the required fees, appellant did not adequately respond. See id. 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees and for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). We dismiss all pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Huddle.


Summaries of

Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Jul 7, 2016
NO. 01-16-00207-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2016)
Case details for

Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan

Case Details

Full title:PROPHET RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, Appellant v. CLEAR LAKE NISSAN AND…

Court:Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas

Date published: Jul 7, 2016

Citations

NO. 01-16-00207-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2016)