DeAngelo P. Boston v. Darrell D. Butler Appeal from County Court at Law No. 5 of Dallas County (memorandum opinion by chief justice wright)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed August 5, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00641-CV DEANGELO P. BOSTON, Appellant V. DARRELL D. BUTLER, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-02064-E MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s judgment. On May 18, 2015, appellant filed an affidavit of indigence in the trial court. The Dallas County Clerk’s May 18, 2015 contest to the affidavit of indigence was sustained by written order on May 28, 2015. By letter dated May 19, 2015, we directed appellant to pay the $195 filing fee for the appeal. By letter dated July 15, 2015, the Court notified appellant that the Dallas County Clerk had informed us appellant had not paid or made payment arrangements for the clerk’s record. Appellant has not responded to either letter, the filing fee has not been paid, and the clerk’s record has not been filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(c). /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 150641F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT DEANGELO P. BOSTON, Appellant No. 05-15-00641-CV On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-02064-E. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. V. DARRELL D. BUTLER, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of prosecution. We ORDER that appellee Darrell D. Butler recover his costs of this appeal from appellant Deangelo P. Boston. Judgment entered this 5th day of August, 2015. –3–

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.