Dalila Mawusi Bailey v. Raymond Carlo Carranza

Court of Appeals of Texas

Dalila Mawusi Bailey v. Raymond Carlo Carranza

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 18, 2025·No. 01-25-00633-CV·Published

Opinion

Opinion issued December 18, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, and in the Business Court, Misc. Docket No. 24-9047 (Tex. July 26, 2024), reprinted in TEX. R. APP. P. app. A § B(1) (listing fees in courts of appeals). The Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that unless she paid the appellate filing fee by October 10, 2025, her appeal could be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). To date, Appellant has not paid the appellate filing fee nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs.

Also, Appellant failed to file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a), 38.8(a). On November 5, 2025, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that her appellate brief was past due, and her appeal was subject to dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f). We directed Appellant to file her brief and a motion requesting an extension to file the brief within 10 days of our notice. Appellant did not respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b)–(c), 43.2(f). We deny any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Guiney, and Morgan.

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

Opinion issued December 18, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, and in the Business Court, Misc. Docket No. 24-9047 (Tex. July 26, 2024), reprinted in TEX. R. APP. P. app. A § B(1) (listing fees in courts of appeals). The Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that unless she paid the appellate filing fee by October 10, 2025, her appeal could be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b). To date, Appellant has not paid the appellate filing fee nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs.

Also, Appellant failed to file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a), 38.8(a). On November 5, 2025, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that her appellate brief was past due, and her appeal was subject to dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f). We directed Appellant to file her brief and a motion requesting an extension to file the brief within 10 days of our notice. Appellant did not respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b)–(c), 43.2(f). We deny any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Rivas-Molloy, Guiney, and Morgan.

Dalila Mawusi Bailey v. Raymond Carlo Carranza, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Pincite

Dalila Mawusi Bailey v. Raymond Carlo Carranza (Dalila Mawusi Bailey v. Raymond Carlo Carranza) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.