Ruby Jean Lute v. Kevin Wallace Frey, MFK Leased Asset Management, and Fire and Ant Rescue, Inc. D/B/A Bug Police

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00471-CV

__________________

RUBY JEAN LUTE, Appellant V.

KEVIN WALLACE FREY, MFK LEASED ASSET MANAGEMENT, AND FIRE AND ANT RESCUE, INC. D/B/A BUG POLICE, Appellees

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 457th District Court Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 23-11-16455

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 19, 2025, Appellant Ruby Jean Lute filed a notice of appeal from a final judgment signed on October 22, 2025. On February 19, 2026, Appellant filed a notice that the parties were in the process of finalizing a settlement. The Clerk of the Court requested that the parties file a report on the status of the settlement agreement by April 6, 2026. On May 11, 2026, the Clerk notified the parties that the status report was late and warned the parties that the Court would move forward with

2

the appeal and reset the due date of the appellate record unless a response was filed by May 21, 2026. On May 22, 2026, the Clerk notified the parties that the record was due June 22, 2026. On June 22, 2026, the trial court clerk notified this Court that no payment arrangements for the record have been made. We notified the parties that Appellant had not established indigent status, and that the clerk’s record had not been filed due to Appellant’s failure to pay or to arrange to pay the fee required to prepare the clerk’s record. We warned Appellant that the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution unless Appellant established that she had made the arrangements required to pay the fee or that she needed more time to do so. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). After the Clerk of this Court sent the parties a letter warning of the consequences of a failure to take the action necessary to file the clerk’s record, the Court did not receive a response.

Appellant has not explained why she has not paid the fee for the clerk’s record;

therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Id. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on August 5, 2026 Opinion Delivered August 6, 2026

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.