Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2016

Yurie Jah Young v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company as Subrogee of Crystal Jenkins F/K/A Crystal Young

Yurie Jah Young v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company as Subrogee of Crystal Jenkins F/K/A Crystal Young
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 14, 2016

Yurie Jah Young v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company as Subrogee of Crystal Jenkins F/K/A Crystal Young

Opinion

NUMBER 13-16-00065-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ YURIE JAH YOUNG, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AS SUBROGEE OF CRYSTAL JENKINS F/K/A CRYSTAL YOUNG, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Yurie Jah Young, appealed a judgment entered by the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. On January 27, 2016, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5. The Clerk directed appellant to file an amended notice of appeal with the district clerk's office within 30 days from the date of that notice. On March 7, 2016, the Clerk notified appellant that the defect had not been corrected and warned appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not cured within ten days. To date, the defect has not been corrected, and the deputy clerk has further informed this Court that appellant has failed to request and make payment arrangements for the clerk’s record in this cause. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c).

On February 12, 2016, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant of the failure to remit a $205.00 filing fee. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal if the filing fee was not paid within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter. See id. 42.3(b),(c).

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s failure to correct the defect and pay the filing fee, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 14th day of April, 2016.

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