From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hood v. Wal-Mart Stores

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Sep 29, 2005
No. 05-05-01049-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 29, 2005)

Opinion

No. 05-05-01049-CV

Opinion Filed September 29, 2005.

On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 04-10679-H.

Dismiss.

Before Chief Justice THOMAS and Justices LANG-MIERS and MAZZANT.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


A review of this appeal shows that appellant filed his notice of appeal on August 2, 2005. Appellant did not file an affidavit of indigency. When appellant did not pay his $125 filing fee, the Court notified him by letter dated August 3, 2005 that he was required to pay the filing fee. The letter directed appellant to pay the fee within ten days and cautioned appellant that the failure to do so would result in his appeal being dismissed without further notice.

On August 15, 2005, this Court received appellant's affidavit of inability to pay costs. We notified appellant by letter dated September 7, 2005 that his affidavit was untimely and he would not be allowed to proceed as an indigent. Again, we notified appellant that the $125 filing fee was due and directed appellant to pay the fee within ten days. We cautioned appellant that his failure to do so would result in the dismissal of the appeal.

On September 21, 2005, appellant filed his "objections to Court's contentions that his affidavit of inability to pay costs was untimely filed." In his objections, appellant asserts his indigency status has remain unchanged since he filed the lawsuit and the Court should therefore allow him to proceed as an indigent or grant him a change of venue.

To be timely, an affidavit of indigence must be filed with or before the notice of appeal. Tex.R.App.P. 20.2(c)(1) (emphasis added). Here, the Court received appellant's affidavit on August 15, and the earliest it could have been mailed was August 11, 2005. Thus, appellant's affidavit of indigency was not filed with or before the notice of appeal. Moreover, appellant did not file a motion seeking to extend time to file the affidavit. Under these circumstances, we conclude the affidavit is untimely, and we overrule appellant's September 21, 2005 objections and deny his request to transfer venue of this case.

The sworn statement at the end of the affidavit is dated August 11, 2005.

As of this date, appellant has not paid the filing fee. Accordingly, we DISMISS this appeal for want of prosecution. See Appendix to the Tex.R.App.P. B(1)(a); Tex.R.App.P. 5 42.3(b), (c).


Summaries of

Hood v. Wal-Mart Stores

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Sep 29, 2005
No. 05-05-01049-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 29, 2005)
Case details for

Hood v. Wal-Mart Stores

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT LEE HOOD, Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., CHRISTINA SNYDER…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Sep 29, 2005

Citations

No. 05-05-01049-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 29, 2005)

Citing Cases

Vodicka v. A.H. Belo Corp.

"[A]ppellate courts are reluctant to take judicial notice of matters which go to the merits of a dispute,"…