in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children

Court of Appeals of Texas

in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children

DecidedSeptember 15, 2010

Docket04-10-00483-CV

StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children (in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children) 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

in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00483-CV

In the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., and B.M.

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-PA-00977

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

Per curiam

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 15, 2010

DISMISSED

A filing fee of $175.00 was due from appellant Benjamin Martinez when this appeal was filed but the fee was not paid. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 51.207(b)(1), 51.941(a)(1) (Vernon 2005); Texas Supreme Court Order Regarding Fees Charged In Civil Cases In the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals (July 21, 1998) § B.1.(a). Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides:

A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay – at the time an item is presented for filing – whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.

Tex. R. App. P. 5.

Accordingly, on August 5, 2010, this court ordered appellant to either (1) pay the applicable filing fee or (2) provide written proof to this court that he is excused by statute or the Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying the fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 (providing that indigent party who complies with provisions of that rule may proceed without advance payment of costs). Our order informed appellant that if he failed to provide such written proof within the time ordered, this appeal would be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Appellant has not responded. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Costs of appeal are assessed against appellant.

PER CURIAM

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00483-CV

In the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., and B.M.

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-PA-00977

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

Per curiam

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 15, 2010

DISMISSED

A filing fee of $175.00 was due from appellant Benjamin Martinez when this appeal was filed but the fee was not paid. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 51.207(b)(1), 51.941(a)(1) (Vernon 2005); Texas Supreme Court Order Regarding Fees Charged In Civil Cases In the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals (July 21, 1998) § B.1.(a). Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides:

A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay – at the time an item is presented for filing – whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.

Tex. R. App. P. 5.

Accordingly, on August 5, 2010, this court ordered appellant to either (1) pay the applicable filing fee or (2) provide written proof to this court that he is excused by statute or the Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying the fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 (providing that indigent party who complies with provisions of that rule may proceed without advance payment of costs). Our order informed appellant that if he failed to provide such written proof within the time ordered, this appeal would be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Appellant has not responded. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. Costs of appeal are assessed against appellant.

PER CURIAM

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

in the Interest of I.B.M., Z.A.M., AND B.M., Minor Children, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ibm-zam-and-bm-minor-children-texapp-2010.