Rick Smart and Alice Smart v. Robert Clark

Opinion

Opinion issued July 2, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

that this appeal was subject to dismissal if appellate costs were not paid, or indigence

was not established, by November 10, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

Appellants did not adequately respond.

Further, appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay the fee for the

preparation of the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). On October 24, 2023,

appellants were notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal if appellants did

not submit written evidence that they had paid or made arrangements to pay the fee

for the preparation of the clerk’s record by November 27, 2023. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(b), (c). Appellants did not adequately respond.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees and

want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c), 43.2(f). We dismiss any

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Landau, Countiss, and Guerra.

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-23-00676-CV ——————————— IN THE INTEREST OF D.A.M., A CHILD On Appeal from the 253rd District Court Chambers County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 21-DCV-0572 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellants, Rick Smart and Alice Smart, have neither paid the required fees nor established indigence for purposes of costs. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145; TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1; see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.851(b), 51.941(a); Order, Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). On October 11, 2023, appellants were notified