Michael Dixson v. Christina Marmolejo
This text of Michael Dixson v. Christina Marmolejo (Michael Dixson v. Christina Marmolejo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ———————————— No. 08-26-00047-CV ————————————
Michael Dixson, Appellant v. Christina Marmolejo, Appellee
On Appeal from the 345th District Court Travis County, Texas Trial Court No. D-1-FM-22-009007
M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether it should be
dismissed for want of prosecution.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).
On January 21, 2026, the Clerk of this Court sent Appellant, Michael Dixson, a letter
requesting payment of the required filing fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in
civil cases unless a party is excused by statute or by appellate rule from paying costs). The letter
1 This case was transferred from the Third Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001. We follow the precedent of the Third Court of Appeals to the extent it might conflict with our own. Tex. R. App. P. 41.3. notified Dixson that failure to pay the filing fee by January 31, 2026, could result in dismissal of
this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3 (c) (authorizing an appellate court to dismiss an appeal where
an appellant fails to comply with a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within
a specified time).
On January 27, 2026, the District Clerk filed a Notification of Late Record stating that
Dixson had failed to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the record. We again notified Dixson that his
appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution if he did not provide documentation showing
that the clerk’s fee had been paid or arrangements had been made to pay the clerk’s fee. We
cautioned that failure to respond by February 6, 2026, could result in the dismissal of the appeal
for want of prosecution. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b).
As of this date, Dixson has not paid the filing fee or otherwise shown an excuse from
payment, nor has he provided documentation showing that arrangements have been made to pay
the clerk’s fee for preparation of the clerk’s record. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See
Tex. R. App. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.
MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice
February 24, 2026
Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Michael Dixson v. Christina Marmolejo, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-dixson-v-christina-marmolejo-txctapp8-2026.