in the Matter of M. P., Minor Child ( 2002 )

Opinion issued June 13, 2002

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

---

NO. 01-01-00119-CV

---

IN THE INTEREST OF M.P., A MINOR CHILD

---

On Appeal from the 314th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 99-04989j

---

O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from an order terminating appellant father's and appellant mother's rights signed on October 31, 2000. Both appellants timely filed motions for new trial, as well as separate, but timely, notices of appeal. On February 22, 2001, the trial court sustained the contest to appellant father's affidavit of indigency, a ruling that has not been challenged in this Court. ⁽¹⁾

On February 7, 2002, the Court issued an order that stated in part as follows:

• The Court's records do not affirmatively show that appellant father has paid the appellate filing fee of $125. See Tex. R. App. P. 5; Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals, Misc. Docket No. 98-9120 (Tex. Jul. 21, 1998); Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 51.207(a) (Vernon Supp. 2002). Unless within 15 days of the date of this order, appellant father pays such filing fee to the Clerk of this Court, his appeal will be dismissed. See Finley v. J.C. Pace Ltd., 4 S.W.3d 319, 321-22 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 1999) (order); Negrini v. Smith, Nelson & Clement P.C., 998 S.W.2d 362, 363 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.).  

• The Court ruled that, because of appellants' failure to pay for the reporter's record, it would proceed to consider the appeal based on the clerk's record and briefs alone. However, because it was not clear if appellant mother received a copy of this Court's order of November 29, 2001 or was aware that the appeal might proceed without the reporter's record if appellants failed to pay for it, the Court ruled that, within 15 days of the date of the order, it would entertain a motion from appellant mother to allow the reporter's record to be filed if she demonstrated that she had requested the court reporter to prepare the record and made payment arrangements for same.

• Appellant father's brief was due 30 days after the date of this order. Appellant mother's brief was due 30 days after the date of this order.

Neither appellant filed a response to this Court's order of February 7, 2002. The court reporter has advised this Court that neither appellant has made payment arrangements for the reporter's record. On April 25, 2002, the Court issued an order stating that unless, within 30 days of the date of the order, each appellant filed (1) a reasonable explanation for his or her failure to timely file appellant's brief, and (2) an appellant's brief, the Court would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b).

Neither appellant has filed an explanation or a brief. Neither appellant has responded to this Court's order of April 25, 2002. Appellant father has not paid the appellate filing fee of $125.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.  

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Schneider and Justices Nuchia and Radack.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.

1.

However, on January 4, 2002, the Court denied appellant's motion to consider his affidavit of indigency as being timely filed.