Daryl L. Jackson and Darlene Kirchen Jackson v. Maypearl Independent School District

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 16, 2023
• Docket: 10-23-00169-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-23-00169-CV

DARYL L. JACKSON AND DARLENE KIRCHEN JACKSON, Appellants v.

MAYPEARL INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee

From the 40th District Court Ellis County, Texas Trial Court No. 21671TX

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Daryl Jackson, acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal on behalf of himself

and Darlene Kirchen Jackson from the trial court’s May 18, 2023 judgment. Daryl is not

an attorney; therefore, he is prohibited from representing Darlene on appeal. See TEX.

GOV’T CODE ANN. § 81.102; Steele v. McDonald, 202 S.W.3d 926, 928 (Tex. App.—Waco

2006, order) (per curiam).

By letter dated June 16, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified Darlene that the Court

may not grant a party who does not file a notice of appeal more favorable relief than did the trial court except for just cause. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(c). The Clerk of the Court also

notified Darlene that although the filing of the notice of appeal by Daryl invokes this

Court’s jurisdiction over all parties to the trial court’s judgment or order appealed from,

any party’s failure to take any other step required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure,

including the failure of another party to perfect an appeal under subsection (c) of Rule

25.1, is a ground for the Court to act appropriately, including dismissing the appeal. See

id. R. 25.1(b).

Furthermore, on July 12, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified Daryl and Darlene

that the original filing fee of $205 was past due and warned Daryl and Darlene that the

Court would dismiss the appeal unless, within twenty-one days from the date of the

letter, Daryl and Darlene paid the filing fee or obtained indigent status for the purpose of

appeal. On July 12, 2023, the Clerk of this Court also notified Daryl and Darlene that the

Court has not received the docketing statement and that this appeal would be dismissed

if the docketing statement was not filed within twenty-one days of the date of the letter.

No response has been received from Daryl or Darlene. Accordingly, this appeal is

dismissed. See id. R. 42.3(c).

MATT JOHNSON Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Dismissed Opinion delivered and filed August 16, 2023 [CV06]

Jackson v. Maypearl Indep. Sch. Dist. Page 2