Betty Ann Newby v. Daniel Moser, Sheria Evans, Moser Investments, the Estate of Lon Moser, Moser and Stubblefield Investments Brian Shinall, D/B/A Real Estate Concepts
NO. 07-03-0507-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
FEBRUARY 11, 2004
______________________________
BETTY ANN NEWBY, APPELLANT
V.
DAN MOSER, MOSER INVESTMENTS, MOSER AND
STUBBLEFIELD INVESTMENTS; SHERIA EVANS; AND
BRIAN SHINALL, D/B/A REAL ESTATE CONCEPTS , APPELLEES
_________________________________
FROM THE 84TH DISTRICT COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;
NO. 35,167; HONORABLE JACK YOUNG, JUDGE
_______________________________
Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and CAMPBELL, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Betty Ann Newby, appearing pro se, has filed a Motion to Extend Payment
Date for Filing Fee, received by this court on January 21, 2004. We deny appellant’s
motion and dismiss the appeal.
On December 2, 2003 appellant filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice
of Appeal and Other Documents. The motion did not identify the trial court, state the case’s
trial court number, state the date of the judgment or order appealed from or state clearly
that appellant desired to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b)(2), 25.1(d). No filing fee was
submitted with the document. Nonetheless, we accepted it as a bona fide attempt to
invoke this court’s jurisdiction. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615 (Tex. 1997).
By letter dated December 31, 2003, appellant was advised by the clerk of this court
that the filing fee had not been received. Appellant was directed to pay the filing fee on or
before January 15, 2004 and was advised that failure to pay the filing fee could result in
dismissal of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Appellant’s Motion to Extend Payment
Date for Filing Fee does not reasonably explain the need for an extension as required by
Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b). The motion summarily states that appellant has a meritorious
appeal but cannot pay the filing fee until February 3, 2004. Moreover, that date has passed
and no filing fee has been received.
Appellant is not excused by statute or the Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying
costs. Tex. R. App. P. 5. Appellant has failed to pay the filing fee as directed by this court.
All parties have had more than ten days’ notice that dismissal could result from appellant’s
failure to comply with the rules and this court’s orders. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).
Accordingly, appellant’s Motion to Extend Payment Date for Filing Fee is denied and the
appeal is dismissed.
Per Curiam
-2-