Maurice Holmes v. Damal African Hair, Damel Hairbraiding, Diop Deguene
Maurice Holmes v. Damal African Hair, Damel Hairbraiding, Diop Deguene
Opinion
Opinion issued August 25, 2011.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-10-00488-CV
———————————
MAURICE HOLMES, Appellant
V.
DAMAL AFRICAN HAIR, DAMEL HAIRBRAIDING, DIOP DEGUENE, Appellees
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 887529
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Maurice Holmes, has neither established indigence, nor paid all the required fees. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil cases unless indigent), 20.1 (listing requirements for establishing indigence); see also Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 51.207, 51.941(a) (Vernon 2005), § 101.041 (Vernon Supp. 2010) (listing fees in court of appeals); Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 07-9138 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2007), reprinted in Tex. R. App. P. app. A § B(1) (listing fees in court of appeals). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did not adequately respond. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (allowing enforcement of rule); 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case).
We dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees.
We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Huddle.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.