Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal

Court of Appeals of Texas

Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal

DecidedMarch 6, 2003

Docket14-02-01264-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal (Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal, (Tex. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 6, 2003

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 6, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-01264-CV

ARTHUR JOHNSON, Appellant

V.

CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 189th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 01-52637

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment or order signed November 26, 2001. The clerk=s record was due December 20, 2002, but has not been filed. The Harris County District Clerk=s office notified this Court that appellant had not made arrangements for payment of the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2). Accordingly, this Court notified appellant that unless he provided proof of payment for the record, his appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

On December 20, 2002, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file the record in which he stated that he had filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs on appeal, and that the district clerk and court reporter had filed no contest to the affidavit. On January 22, 2003, Darla Turner, the Supervisor for the Civil Post Judgment section of the Harris County District Clerk=s Office, filed an affidavit with this Court stating that there is no affidavit of indigency filed for this appeal. Accordingly, on January 30, 2003, the Court issued an order informing appellant that unless he provided proof of payment for the clerk=s record by February 14, 2003, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

Appellant filed a motion requesting the Court set aside its order requiring him to pay for the record and provide proof of payment to this Court and requesting an extension of time to check the district court file. The motion is denied.

Appellant has not provided proof of payment for the record in accordance with this Court=s order of January 30, 2003. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed March 6, 2003.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Fowler and Edelman.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 6, 2003

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 6, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-01264-CV

ARTHUR JOHNSON, Appellant

V.

CITY OF HOUSTON, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 189th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 01-52637

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment or order signed November 26, 2001. The clerk=s record was due December 20, 2002, but has not been filed. The Harris County District Clerk=s office notified this Court that appellant had not made arrangements for payment of the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2). Accordingly, this Court notified appellant that unless he provided proof of payment for the record, his appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

On December 20, 2002, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file the record in which he stated that he had filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs on appeal, and that the district clerk and court reporter had filed no contest to the affidavit. On January 22, 2003, Darla Turner, the Supervisor for the Civil Post Judgment section of the Harris County District Clerk=s Office, filed an affidavit with this Court stating that there is no affidavit of indigency filed for this appeal. Accordingly, on January 30, 2003, the Court issued an order informing appellant that unless he provided proof of payment for the clerk=s record by February 14, 2003, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

Appellant filed a motion requesting the Court set aside its order requiring him to pay for the record and provide proof of payment to this Court and requesting an extension of time to check the district court file. The motion is denied.

Appellant has not provided proof of payment for the record in accordance with this Court=s order of January 30, 2003. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P.37.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed March 6, 2003.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Fowler and Edelman.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Arthur Johnson v. City of Houston, Etal, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arthur-johnson-v-city-of-houston-etal-texapp-2003.