Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 10, 2018
Docket06-18-00007-CV
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Sharron Umoh v. Good Shepherd Medical Center Marshall, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

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

Bluebook (online)
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.