Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall
This text of Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall (Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall) 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
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-18-00007-CV
SHARRON UMOH, Appellant
V.
GOOD SHEPHERD MEDICAL CENTER MARSHALL, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law Harrison County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016-10,155-CCL
Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Burgess MEMORANDUM OPINION Sharron Umoh, appellant, filed a notice of appeal in this matter on February 5, 2018. Both
the clerk’s and reporter’s records were due to be filed with this Court on or before February 21,
2018. Neither of the records has been filed, and there is no indication that Umoh has paid or made
arrangements for payment of the fees associated with their preparation. Further, Umoh has not
tendered the mandatory $205.00 filing fee associated with this appeal.
“A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay—at the
time an item is presented for filing—whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order.
The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.” TEX. R. APP. P. 5. Similarly,
unless otherwise excused, an appellant must either pay or make arrangements for the payment of
the fees related to preparation of the appellate record to ensure that the record is timely filed. TEX.
R. APP. P. 35.3(a)(2), (b)(3), 37.3(b).
By letter dated March 8, 2018, and pursuant to Rules 37.3(b) and 42.3(b) and (c) of the
Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, our clerk’s office provided Umoh with notice of and an
opportunity to cure these defects. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). The clerk’s letter
further warned Umoh that, if she did not submit an adequate response to our defect letter within
ten days of the date of the letter, her appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution.
We have received no communication from Umoh responsive to the March 8 correspondence from
our clerk’s office, and we have received neither the required filing fee nor the appellate record.
2 Pursuant to Rules 37.3(b) and 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we dismiss
this appeal for want of prosecution.
Ralph K. Burgess Justice
Date Submitted: April 9, 2018 Date Decided: April 10, 2018
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharron-umoh-v-good-shepherd-medical-center-marshall-texapp-2018.