William Hildalgo v. Joelma Shutz

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 7, 2025
• Docket: 01-25-00375-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued August 7, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00375-CV ——————————— WILLIAM SALVADOR HILDALGO, Appellant V. JOELMA SCHUTZ, Appellee

On Appeal from the 280th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2024-64510

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant William Salvador Hidalgo appeals from a protective order signed

on February 17, 2025. Appellant has not paid for the clerk’s record or the required

filing fee and has not established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 5, 20.1 (indigence), 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of appeal if no clerk’s

record filed due to appellant’s fault); see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041; Order Regarding Fees Charged in the Supreme Court,

in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-

District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158.

The Court issued a notice on June 17, 2025 (past due fee) that the appeal might

be subject to appeal unless the filing fee was paid. The Court’s notice advised that,

unless appellant paid the filing fee by July 17, 2025, the appeal might be dismissed.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (allowing enforcement of rule), 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of

appeal if no clerk’s record filed due to appellant’s fault), 42.3(c) (allowing

involuntary dismissal of case). No response was received.

The Court also issued a notice on June 23, 2025, advising appellant that the

Court might dismiss the appeal for failure to pay or make financial arrangements for

the filing of the clerk’s record unless appellant submitted written evidence by July

23, 2025, showing that he had paid or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s

record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (allowing enforcement of rule), 37.3(b) (allowing

dismissal of appeal if no clerk’s record filed due to appellant’s fault), 42.3(c)

(allowing involuntary dismissal of case). No response was received.

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c),

43.2(f). We dismiss all pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Gunn, and Dokupil.