David Bradley Williams v. Valicity Kim Vigil

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 25, 2025
Docket10-25-00195-CV
StatusPublished

This text of David Bradley Williams v. Valicity Kim Vigil (David Bradley Williams v. Valicity Kim Vigil) 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
David Bradley Williams v. Valicity Kim Vigil, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-25-00195-CV

David Bradley Williams, Appellant

v.

Valicity Kim Vigil, Appellee

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 of Johnson County, Texas Judge F. Steven McClure, presiding Trial Court Cause No. CC-D20250096

JUSTICE SMITH delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, David Bradley Williams, filed an appeal of a protective order

signed on June 16, 2025. In the docketing statement filed with this Court,

Appellant stated that he had not made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s

record, but did not indicate if one had been requested. Appellant affirmatively

stated that he is not indigent in the docketing statement. On August 26, 2025, this Court was informed by the trial court clerk that

the Appellant had not paid or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record.

That same day, the Clerk of this Court issued a letter to Appellant to advise

him that the clerk’s record had not been filed due to his failure to pay for or to

make arrangements to pay for the record. Appellant was also informed that

he should pay for or make arrangements to pay for the record and inform this

Court that he had done so on or before Tuesday, September 16, 2025.

Appellant was further advised that the failure to comply with the Clerk’s letter

might result in the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.

Appellant did not comply with the letter from the Clerk regarding

making the payment for the clerk’s record, and the clerk’s record has not been

filed with this Court. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of

prosecution and for failing to comply with a requirement of “a notice from the

clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time.” See TEX. R.

APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(c).

STEVE SMITH Justice

Williams v. Vigil Page 2 OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: September 25, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Appeal dismissed CV06

Williams v. Vigil Page 3

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
David Bradley Williams v. Valicity Kim Vigil, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-bradley-williams-v-valicity-kim-vigil-texapp-2025.