Peter E. Pratt, Jr. v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 26, 2016
Docket03-16-00113-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Peter E. Pratt, Jr. v. State (Peter E. Pratt, Jr. v. State) 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
Peter E. Pratt, Jr. v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-16-00113-CV

Peter E. Pratt, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, et al., Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-GV-08-001748, HONORABLE GISELA D. TRIANA, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Peter E. Pratt, Jr., claiming to be acting in the capacity of a court-appointed receiver

in a post-judgment equitable receivership,1 filed a notice of appeal challenging a trial court order

granting an accounting. The appellate record must include the clerk’s record from the trial court.2

The clerk’s record in this cause was due in this Court on March 3, 2016, but no record was filed.3

We received notice from the Travis County district clerk’s office on March 7, 2016, that Pratt

has neither paid nor made arrangement for payment of the record.4 If the clerk’s record is not filed

because the appellant failed to pay, this Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.5

1 The record before us does not elaborate further regarding the subject of the receivership. 2 See Tex. R. App. P. 34.1, 34.5(a). 3 See id. R. 35.1(b). 4 Nor has Pratt preserved any claim that he is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. See id. R. 20.1(2), 37.3(b). 5 See id. R. 37.3(b). On March 9, 2016, we sent notice to Pratt that the clerk’s record was overdue and that

the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution if Pratt did not make arrangements for the

clerk’s record or submit a status report to this Court on or before March 21, 2016. To date, Pratt has

not responded in any way, and the clerk’s record has not been filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the

appeal for want of prosecution.6

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Bourland

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: May 26, 2016

6 See id. R. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Peter E. Pratt, Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peter-e-pratt-jr-v-state-texapp-2016.