Narrative Opinion Summary
On October 24, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas addressed the motion to dismiss the appeal filed by Tom's Auto Transport, Inc. due to the appellant Frank A. Richards' perceived lack of prosecution. The court denied the motion, noting that the deadline for the appellant's brief had not yet been triggered. The court referenced a prior directive issued on August 22, 2017, requiring the appellant to provide written verification of his request for the reporter’s record and to indicate whether he had paid the reporter’s fee or qualified for a waiver. The appellant failed to comply with this directive. Consequently, the court ordered the appeal to proceed without the reporter's record and instructed the appellant to file his brief by November 22, 2017.
Legal Issues Addressed
Compliance with Court Directivessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court emphasized the appellant's failure to comply with a directive to verify the request for the reporter's record and to address the payment of the reporter's fee.
Reasoning: The appellant failed to comply with this directive.
Deadline for Filing Appellant's Briefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court set a new deadline for the appellant to file his brief, providing a specific date to ensure the continuation of the appeal process.
Reasoning: The court instructed the appellant to file his brief by November 22, 2017.
Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecutionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court addressed a motion to dismiss the appeal due to the appellant's perceived lack of prosecution but denied the motion because the deadline for the appellant's brief had not yet been triggered.
Reasoning: The court denied the motion, noting that the deadline for the appellant's brief had not yet been triggered.
Proceeding Without Reporter’s Recordsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Due to the appellant's non-compliance, the court decided the appeal would proceed without the reporter's record.
Reasoning: Consequently, the court ordered the appeal to proceed without the reporter's record.