Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2010

Tony Garza v. United Supermarket, L.L.C.

Tony Garza v. United Supermarket, L.L.C.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided January 12, 2010

Tony Garza v. United Supermarket, L.L.C.

Opinion

NO. 07-09-0389-CV


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL A


JANUARY 12, 2010



______________________________




TONY GARZA, APPELLANT


V.


UNITED SUPERMARKETS, L.L.C., APPELLEE


_________________________________


FROM THE 237TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;


NO. 2008-544,606; HONORABLE RUBEN REYES, JUDGE


_______________________________


Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Tony Garza, perfected this appeal from the trial court's order granting United Supermarkets, L.L.C.'s, no-evidence motion for summary judgment. By letter dated December 15, 2009, Garza was notified, among other things, that the $175 filing fee had not been paid and was given until December 27, 2009 to correct the deficiency. Garza was also notified that failure to pay the filing fee could result in dismissal of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 and 42.3(c). To date the fee has not been paid nor has Garza responded to the Court's notice.

Unless a party is excused from paying a filing fee, the Clerk of this Court is required to collect filing fees set by statute or the Supreme Court when an item is presented for filing. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 and 12.1(b). Although the filing of a notice of appeal invokes this Court's jurisdiction, if a party fails to follow the prescribed rules of appellate procedure, the appeal may be dismissed. Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b). Consequently, because the filing fee has not been paid, we must dismiss the appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and with a notice from the Clerk requiring payment of the filing fee. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).

Patrick A. Pirtle

Justice

.

Appellants' brief was filed on February 2, 1989. Appellee has filed no brief. On January 3, 1989, appellants filed a "Suggestion of Bankruptcy" notifying this court that appellant Larry Womble had filed for bankruptcy. On April 28, 1992, this court issued its order abating the appeal until the receipt of notice that the bankruptcy stay had been removed.

Nothing further occurred in this court and, on June 13, 2002, under instruction from the court, our clerk notified all attorneys of record requesting information as to the status of the bankruptcy and directing that a reply be made not later than ten days from the date of the written notice. In response to that notice, we received a notification that Larry Womble had been discharged in bankruptcy on February 6, 1994.

However, other than that information about the discharge in bankruptcy, none of the attorneys of record, with the exception of the attorney for the FDIC, were able to give us any information about the status of the case. The notification to the attorney of record for the FDIC was returned with the notation that she had moved and left no forwarding address. We have received a June 17, 2002 letter from appellants' attorney of record to another attorney, in which appellants' attorney states that "I simply do not recall facts sufficient to respond to the Court's request."

Thus, no satisfactory response justifying the retention of this case on our docket, we must, and do hereby, dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.



John T. Boyd

Senior Justice



Do not publish.

1. John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment. Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §75.002(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2002).

2.This type of proceeding is now denominated as a Restricted Appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 30.

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