Britton Elkins v. Beacons Sales Acquisition, Inc.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 30, 2024
• Docket: 07-23-00058-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-23-00058-CV

BRITTON ELKINS, APPELLANT

V.

BEACON SALES ACQUISITION, INC., APPELLEE

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021-007293-1, Honorable Don Pierson, Presiding

October 30, 2024 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, Britton Elkins, proceeding pro se, appeals from the trial court’s Final

Default Judgment.1 On April 20, 2023, we abated this appeal after receiving notice of

Elkins’s bankruptcy proceedings filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the

Southern District of Texas (In re Britton Gill Elkins, case number 23-30199). See TEX. R.

1 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by

the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. APP. P. 8.1, 8.2. Our order directed the parties to promptly inform the Court of the

resolution of the bankruptcy proceeding or any other event authorizing reinstatement of

the appeal. We later discovered that the bankruptcy court closed Elkins’s case on April

22, 2024. However, neither party filed any notice with this Court.

By letter of September 18, 2024, we directed the parties to advise the Court of the

status of the bankruptcy proceeding by September 30, but no response was received.

We sent a second letter on October 9, 2024, again directing the parties to provide a status

of the bankruptcy proceedings. In the letter, we advised Elkins that failure to do so by

October 21 would result in reinstatement and dismissal of this appeal for failure to comply

with a directive of the Court and a notice from the Clerk requiring a response within a

specified time. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Elkins has had no further communication

with the Court to date.

Accordingly, we reinstate the appeal and dismiss it due to Elkins’s failure to comply

with the Court’s order and the Clerk’s notice requiring timely action. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(c).

Per Curiam