Karen Kristine Silvio v. the Windsor Auction Company

CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 7, 2016
Docket14-16-00252-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Karen Kristine Silvio v. the Windsor Auction Company (Karen Kristine Silvio v. the Windsor Auction Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Karen Kristine Silvio v. the Windsor Auction Company, (Tex. 2016).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 7, 2016.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-16-00252-CV

KAREN KRISTINE SILVIO, Appellant V. THE WINDSOR AUCTION COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2015-40326

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed February 2, 2016. The notice of appeal was filed March 22, 2016. To date, our records show that appellant has not paid the appellate filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil cases unless party is excused by statute or by appellate rules from paying costs). Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 51.207. On April 19, 2016, appellant filed an affidavit of indigence, which was referred to the trial court. Both the Harris County District Clerk and appellee filed contests to appellant’s affidavit of inability to pay costs. On May 3, 2016, the trial court signed an order sustaining the contests.

On May 10, 2016, appellant filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial court’s order sustaining the contests to the affidavit of indigence. On May 20, 2016, this court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the contests.

On May 20, 2016, this court further ordered appellant to pay the appellate filing fee and provide the court with proof of payment for the record on or before June 6, 2016, or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has not paid the appellate filing fee or provided proof of payment for the record. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case because appellant has failed to comply with notice from clerk requiring response or other action within specified time).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Busby, Donovan, and Wise.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Karen Kristine Silvio v. the Windsor Auction Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karen-kristine-silvio-v-the-windsor-auction-company-tex-2016.