Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name)

Court of Appeals of Texas

Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name)

DecidedOctober 27, 2005

Docket13-05-00252-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name) (Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name)) 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

Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name), (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-05-252-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MICHAEL RAY WASH, JR., Appellant,

v.

NON ADVERSARY (CHANGE OF NAME), Appellee.

On appeal from the 133^rd District Court

of Harris County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Rodriguez

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Michael Ray Wash, Jr., attempts to appeal from a judgment entered by the 133^rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, in cause number 2004-6024. On May 24, 2005, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that his motion to proceed as an indigent had been denied by the Court. The Clerk requested payment of the $125.00 filing fee for the notice of appeal and the $10.00 filing fee for the motion. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), the Clerk further notified appellant that his appeal was subject to dismissal because of his failure to comply with the Court=s previous notice regarding the filing fees and that if the filing fees were not paid within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed.

Appellant has since moved for reconsideration of his motion regarding indigent status but has paid none of the requisite fees.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the fees, this Court=s notice, and appellant=s failure to correct the defect, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Accordingly, we deny appellant=s motion for reconsideration of his indigent status and deny any other pending motions as moot.

The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum opinion delivered and filed

this 27^th day of October, 2005.

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

NUMBER 13-05-252-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MICHAEL RAY WASH, JR., Appellant,

v.

NON ADVERSARY (CHANGE OF NAME), Appellee.

On appeal from the 133^rd District Court

of Harris County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Rodriguez

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Michael Ray Wash, Jr., attempts to appeal from a judgment entered by the 133^rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, in cause number 2004-6024. On May 24, 2005, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that his motion to proceed as an indigent had been denied by the Court. The Clerk requested payment of the $125.00 filing fee for the notice of appeal and the $10.00 filing fee for the motion. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), the Clerk further notified appellant that his appeal was subject to dismissal because of his failure to comply with the Court=s previous notice regarding the filing fees and that if the filing fees were not paid within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed.

Appellant has since moved for reconsideration of his motion regarding indigent status but has paid none of the requisite fees.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the fees, this Court=s notice, and appellant=s failure to correct the defect, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Accordingly, we deny appellant=s motion for reconsideration of his indigent status and deny any other pending motions as moot.

The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum opinion delivered and filed

this 27^th day of October, 2005.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Michael Ray Wash, Jr. v. Non Adversary (Change of Name), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-ray-wash-jr-v-non-adversary-change-of-name-texapp-2005.