You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Sabiha Yusufzai v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for the Certificateholders of the MLMI Trust, Mortage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-WMC2

Citation: Not availableDocket: 02-14-00002-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; April 17, 2014; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

On March 20, 2014, the Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas notified Sabiha Yusufzai, the appellant, that the trial court clerk had not received payment arrangements for the preparation of the clerk's record, which is required under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2). The court warned that failure to make payment arrangements within ten days would result in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. As the appellant did not comply, the court dismissed the appeal and stated that the appellant is responsible for all costs associated with the appeal, with execution for costs to issue. The judgment was delivered on April 17, 2014, by a panel including Justices Gabriel, Livingston, and Dauphinot.

Legal Issues Addressed

Dismissal of Appeal for Want of Prosecution

Application: The appellant's failure to make payment arrangements for the preparation of the clerk's record led to the dismissal of the appeal.

Reasoning: The court warned that failure to make payment arrangements within ten days would result in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution.

Requirement to Arrange Payment for Clerk's Record

Application: Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2), the appellant was required to make payment arrangements for the preparation of the clerk's record, which she failed to do.

Reasoning: The Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas notified Sabiha Yusufzai, the appellant, that the trial court clerk had not received payment arrangements for the preparation of the clerk's record, which is required under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(a)(2).

Responsibility for Costs in Appeal

Application: The appellant was held responsible for all costs associated with the appeal due to non-compliance with procedural requirements.

Reasoning: As the appellant did not comply, the court dismissed the appeal and stated that the appellant is responsible for all costs associated with the appeal, with execution for costs to issue.