Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2009

Concord Capital Group, LLC and Concord Capital Group, Trustee v. Cedar Point Property Owner's Association, Inc.

Concord Capital Group, LLC and Concord Capital Group, Trustee v. Cedar Point Property Owner's Association, Inc.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided May 14, 2009

Concord Capital Group, LLC and Concord Capital Group, Trustee v. Cedar Point Property Owner's Association, Inc.

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________



NO. 09-09-00080-CV

____________________



CONCORD CAPITAL GROUP, LLC AND CONCORD CAPITAL

GROUP, TRUSTEE, Appellants



V.



CEDAR POINT PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee


On Appeal from the 258th District Court

Polk County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CIV24443




MEMORANDUM OPINION


The judgment was signed November 10, 2008, and a motion for new trial was filed within thirty days of the date of judgment. Notice of appeal was due February 9, 2009. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a). Concord Capital Group, LLC and Concord Capital Group, Trustee filed notice of appeal on February 24, 2009. On March 9, 2009, appellee Cedar Point Property Owner's Association filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. On March 12, 2009, we notified the parties that the notice of appeal had not been timely filed but that appellants could request an extension of time for filing notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Appellants neither filed a response to appellee's motion to dismiss nor filed a motion for extension of time for filing notice of appeal. On April 8, 2009, the trial court clerk notified the Court that appellants had not made arrangements to pay for the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3. On April 16, 2009, we notified the parties that the appeal would be dismissed unless within ten days appellants: (1) filed a motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal; (2) paid the filing fee for appeal; and (3) either proved arrangements had been made to pay the fee for the clerk's record or explained why additional time was needed for filing the clerk's record. Appellants neither filed a response nor paid the filing fee for the appeal.

Upon motion or notice, an appellate court may dismiss an appeal if the appeal is subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction, for want of prosecution, or because the appellants failed to comply with a requirement of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Here, the appellants failed to pay the filing fee when directed to do so, failed to file a motion for extension of time when directed to do so, failed to show that they were not at fault for the failure to file the clerk's record, and failed to respond to the appellee's motion that alleged appellants had failed to timely perfect the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

____________________________

STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice



Opinion Delivered May 14, 2009

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.