In the Interest of H.T.A.-H. and A.M.A.-H. v. the State of Texas
This text of In the Interest of H.T.A.-H. and A.M.A.-H. v. the State of Texas (In the Interest of H.T.A.-H. and A.M.A.-H. v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-26-00085-CV __________________
IN THE INTEREST OF H.T.A.-H. AND A.M.A.-H.
__________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 317th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 25DCFM1154 __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 13, 2026, Derrick Abdul-Hakim filed a notice of appeal from a
final judgment signed on January 16, 2026. Upon receiving the notice of appeal from
Appellant, the Clerk of the Court issued an invoice for the filing fee for the appeal.
On March 16, 2026, we received Appellant’s request for additional time to pay the
filing fee, but the request was marked “received” and not filed because it lacked a
certificate of service and information required by Tex. R. App. P. 9.5(e). By letter
dated April 14, 2026, we notified Appellant he must serve a copy of the motion on
1 the Appellees and provide a certificate of service in compliance with the applicable
rule.
On April 16, 2026, the District Clerk notified the Court that Appellant had
failed to pay or to make the arrangements necessary for the District Clerk to prepare
the clerk’s record. In our letter to the parties dated April 16, 2026, we notified the
parties that Appellant had not established indigent status, and that the clerk’s record
had not been filed due to Appellant’s failure to pay or to arrange to pay the fee
required to prepare the clerk’s record. We warned Appellant that the appeal would
be dismissed for want of prosecution unless Appellant established that he had made
the arrangements required to pay the fee or that he needed more time to do so. See
id. 37.3(b). After the Clerk of this Court 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.
On May 18, 2026, we notified the parties that Appellant had not paid the filing
fee as directed in our letter and invoice previously forwarded to Appellant. A
Certified Bill of Costs for the filing fee was enclosed and provided to Appellant. We
warned Appellant in our letter dated May 18, 2026, that unless the filing fee was
paid, the appeal would be dismissed without further notice on any date after Tuesday,
June 2, 2026. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). As of this date, Appellant has failed to
pay the filing fee as directed by this Court.
2 Appellant has not paid the filing fee for the appeal, nor has he explained why
he has not paid the fee for the clerk’s record; therefore, we dismiss the appeal for
want of prosecution. Id. 5, 42.3(c), 43.2(f).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on July 1, 2026 Opinion Delivered July 2, 2026
Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Chambers, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of H.T.A.-H. and A.M.A.-H. v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-hta-h-and-ama-h-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp9-2026.