Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, and the Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec
This text of Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, and the Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec (Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, and the Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec) 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
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00483-CV
Rowland MARTIN, Jr., Appellant
v. Edward BRAVENEC and Law Office and Edward BRAVENEC and The Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec, Appellees
From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014-CI-07644 Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2014
DISMISSED
After this appeal was abated to the trial court to consider an affidavit of indigence filed by
appellant in this appeal, the trial court entered an order granting the contests to appellant’s affidavit
and finding that the appellant is not indigent. On August 26, 2014, appellant filed a third
supplemental notice of appeal which this court construed as a motion for review. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 20.1(j)(1). By order dated August 27, 2014, this court denied appellant’s motion for review and
ordered appellant to file written proof by September 19, 2014, establishing that he had paid or
made arrangements to pay the fees for the preparation of the clerk’s record and reporter’s record 04-14-00483-CV
for this appeal. Our order stated that if appellant failed to file written proof within the time
provided, this appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b),
42.3(b).
On September 18, 2014, appellant filed a “Motion to Rehear in Part and to Abate in Part
Pursuant to the Texas Citizen’s Participation Act.” Appellant’s motion is denied. Because
appellant failed to file written proof of record payment in accordance with this court’s prior order,
this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b-c).
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, and the Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowland-martin-jr-v-edward-bravenec-and-the-law-of-texapp-2014.