James P Arthur v. John Michael Raborn, Blackburne & Brown Mortgage Fund, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 19, 2021
Docket01-21-00072-CV
StatusPublished

This text of James P Arthur v. John Michael Raborn, Blackburne & Brown Mortgage Fund, Inc. (James P Arthur v. John Michael Raborn, Blackburne & Brown Mortgage Fund, Inc.) 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
James P Arthur v. John Michael Raborn, Blackburne & Brown Mortgage Fund, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Opinion issued August 19, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-21-00072-CV ——————————— JAMES P. ARTHUR, MARY ARTHUR, LEGONITE, INC., PARADISE LIVING, INC., AND ARTHUR HOLDINGS, L.P., Appellants V. JOHN M. RABORN, Appellee

On Appeal from the 11th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2020-13849

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The appellate record in this appeal was due to be filed on or before

March 8, 2021. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.1. The clerk’s record was not timely filed.

On May 4, 2021, the trial court clerk notified the Court that the clerk’s record was

not filed because appellants, James P. Arthur, Mary Arthur, Legonite, Inc., Paradise Living, Inc., and Arthur Holdings, L.P. (collectively, “appellants”), had not paid or

made arrangements to pay the fee for the preparation of the clerk’s record. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2).

This Court’s records reflect that appellants have neither established indigence

for purposes of appellate costs nor arranged to pay the fee for the preparation of the

clerk’s record. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145, TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). On May 4, 2021,

appellants were notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal if appellants did

not submit written evidence that they had paid or made arrangements to pay the fee

for the preparation of the clerk’s record, or were otherwise exempt from paying the

clerk’s fee, on or before June 3, 2021. Appellants did not adequately respond.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Farris.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
James P Arthur v. John Michael Raborn, Blackburne & Brown Mortgage Fund, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-p-arthur-v-john-michael-raborn-blackburne-brown-mortgage-fund-texapp-2021.