William Fiifi Acquah v. Florence Dadson

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 26, 2016
Docket03-15-00660-CV
StatusPublished

This text of William Fiifi Acquah v. Florence Dadson (William Fiifi Acquah v. Florence Dadson) 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
William Fiifi Acquah v. Florence Dadson, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-15-00660-CV

William Fiifi Acquah, Appellant

v.

Florence Dadson, Appellee

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY NO. 15-2797-FC4, HONORABLE JOHN B. McMASTER, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant William Fiifi Acquah’s notice of appeal was filed in this Court on

October 19, 2015. On October 20, we notified him that he was required to make a written request

and arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record within ten days from his

receipt of our letter. The clerk’s record from the trial court was due to be filed in this Court on

November 16, 2015.

On November 30, 2015, this Court notified Acquah that no clerk’s record had been

filed due to his failure to pay or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk’s record.

The Court’s notice requested that Acquah make arrangements for the clerk’s record and submit a

status report regarding this appeal by December 10. In addition, the notice informed Acquah that

his appeal was subject to dismissal if he did not comply with our instructions. To date, Acquah has not filed a status report or otherwise responded to this Court’s notice, and the clerk’s record has not

been filed.

If the trial court’s clerk fails to file the clerk’s record due to appellant’s failure to pay

or make arrangements to pay for the clerk’s fee for preparing the record, the appellate court may

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without

payment of costs. Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). In this case, Acquah has not established that he is

entitled to proceed without payment of costs, see Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 (providing procedure for

establishing indigence on appeal), and he has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s

fee for preparing the clerk’s record. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

__________________________________________ Cindy Olson Bourland, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Bourland

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: January 26, 2016

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
William Fiifi Acquah v. Florence Dadson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-fiifi-acquah-v-florence-dadson-texapp-2016.