in the Interest of Q.E.W, S.M.S. A/K/A S.M.S., LM.S. A/K/A L.M.S.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 4, 2006
Docket14-05-00767-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of Q.E.W, S.M.S. A/K/A S.M.S., LM.S. A/K/A L.M.S. (in the Interest of Q.E.W, S.M.S. A/K/A S.M.S., LM.S. A/K/A L.M.S.) 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 Q.E.W, S.M.S. A/K/A S.M.S., LM.S. A/K/A L.M.S., (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 4, 2006

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 4, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-05-00767-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Q.E.W., S.M.S. a/k/a S.M.S., L.M.S a/k/a L.M.S

On Appeal from the 313th District Court

Harris County , Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 04-10131J

M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N

This appeal is from a judgment signed July 11, 2005.  No clerk=s record has been filed.  The clerk responsible for preparing the record in this appeal informed the court appellant did not make arrangements to pay for the record. 

On August 30, 2005, notification was transmitted to all parties of the Court's intent to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within fifteen days, appellant paid or made arrangements to pay for the record and provided this court with proof of payment.  See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).


Appellant filed no response.  On September 29, 2005, we issued an order, directing the trial court to determine whether appellant was indigent.  The trial court filed its findings on February 13, 2006, noting that counsel had been appointed, and that, although appellant was not found to be indigent, appointed counsel could be reimbursed for any expenses he incurred on behalf of appellant.  On February 16, 2006, we issued an order, directing appointed counsel to make financial arrangements for the record or the appeal would be dismissed.  No response was filed.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed May 4, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Edelman, and Frost.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Interest of Q.E.W, S.M.S. A/K/A S.M.S., LM.S. A/K/A L.M.S., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-qew-sms-aka-sms-lms-aka-lms-texapp-2006.