Birtan Yentur v. Munevver D. Korkmaz
This text of Birtan Yentur v. Munevver D. Korkmaz (Birtan Yentur v. Munevver D. Korkmaz) 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.
Opinion
Opinion issued September 16, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-21-00153-CV ——————————— BIRTAN YENTUR, Appellant V. MUNEVVER D. KORKMAZ, Appellee
On Appeal from the 387th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 20-DCV-278942
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Birtan Yentur, has neither established indigence for purposes of
court costs nor paid or made arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk’s
record. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145; TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a), (b). After being notified
that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond to this Court’s notice and a clerk’s record has not been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P.
37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Countiss.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Birtan Yentur v. Munevver D. Korkmaz, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/birtan-yentur-v-munevver-d-korkmaz-texapp-2021.