Eddie v. Picard, Patricia M. Picard, and JPP Ventures, LLC v. Eagle Coiled Tubing, LLC, Hicham "Sean" Mziguir, Michael McCoy, and Gary Williamson

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 12, 2024
• Docket: 09-24-00321-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-24-00321-CV __________________

EDDIE V. PICARD, PATRICIA M. PICARD, AND JPP VENTURES, LLC, Appellants

V.

EAGLE COILED TUBING, LLC, HICHAM "SEAN" MZIGUIR, MICHAEL MCCOY, AND GARY WILLIAMSON, Appellees

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 284th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 24-08-12344-CV __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On September 17, 2024, Eddie V. Picard, Patricia M. Picard, and JPP

Ventures, LLC, filed a notice of appeal from a judgment of the 284th District Court,

signed on August 1, 2024. On September 19, 2024, we granted an extension of time

to file notice of appeal. Upon receiving the notice of appeal from Appellants, the

Clerk of the Court issued a Bill of Costs for the filing fee for the appeal. By letter 1 dated October 22, 2024, we notified the parties that Appellants had not paid the filing

fee as directed in our letter and Bill of Costs previously forwarded to Appellants. A

Certified Bill of Costs for the filing fee was enclosed and provided to Appellants.

We also warned Appellants that unless the filing fee was paid, the appeal would be

dismissed without further notice on any date after Friday, November 1, 2024. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). As of this date, Appellants have failed to pay the filing fee

as directed by this Court.

On September 30, 2024, the District Clerk notified the Court that Appellants

had failed to pay or to make the arrangements necessary for the District Clerk to

prepare the clerk’s record. Consequently, we notified the parties that Appellants had

not established indigent status and that the clerk’s record had not been filed due to

Appellants’ failure to pay or to arrange to pay the fee required to prepare the clerk’s

record. We also warned Appellants that the appeal would be dismissed for want of

prosecution unless Appellants established that they had made the arrangements

required to pay the fee or that they needed more time to do so. See id. 37.3(b). After

the Clerk sent the parties a letter warning of the consequences of a failure to take the

action necessary to file the clerk’s record, the Court did not receive a response.

2 Because Appellants have not paid the filing fee for the appeal nor have they

explained why they have not paid the fee for the clerk’s record, we dismiss the appeal

for want of prosecution. Id. 5, 42.3, 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on December 11, 2024 Opinion Delivered December 12, 2024

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Chambers, JJ.