Kordaryl Thompson v. Jose Guadalupe Cisneros
This text of Kordaryl Thompson v. Jose Guadalupe Cisneros (Kordaryl Thompson v. Jose Guadalupe Cisneros) 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.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-23-00055-CV
KORDARYL THOMPSON, Appellant
V.
JOSE GUADALUPE CISNEROS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 71st District Court Harrison County, Texas Trial Court No. 18-1405
Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Stevens MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kordaryl Thompson, appellant, filed a notice of appeal in this matter on June 26, 2023.
Appellant did not file a docketing statement in accordance with Rule 32.1 of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 32.1. Further, appellant did not tender the mandatory
$205.00 filing fee associated with the appeal, see TEX. R. APP. P. 5, and did not file proof of
indigency in lieu of a filing fee, see TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1.
“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.
By letter dated July 17, 2023, we provided appellant with notice of and an opportunity to
cure these defects. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c). The clerk’s letter further warned appellant
that, if he did not submit an adequate response to the notice by July 27, 2023, this appeal would
be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution and for failure to comply with the above-cited
rules. Appellant did not file a docketing statement, did not pay the mandatory filing fee, and did
not file proof of indigency in lieu of a filing fee. Further, we have received no communication
from appellant responsive to the July 17 correspondence. Accordingly, this appeal is ripe for
dismissal.
2 Pursuant to Rules 42.3, subsections (b) and (c), of the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.
Scott E. Stevens Chief Justice
Date Submitted: August 8, 2023 Date Decided: August 9, 2023
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kordaryl Thompson v. Jose Guadalupe Cisneros, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kordaryl-thompson-v-jose-guadalupe-cisneros-texapp-2023.