Rowena Reyes and all occupants v. Wells Fargo Bank NA Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2 of Dallas County (memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed and Opinion Filed November 4, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00875-CV ROWENA REYES AND ALL OCCUPANTS, Appellants V. WELLS FARGO BANK NA, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-02674-B MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Francis, and Myers Opinion by Justice Bridges The filing fee in this case is past due. By postcard dated July 20, 2015, we notified appellants the $195 filing fee was due. We directed appellants to remit the filing fee within ten days and expressly cautioned appellants that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal. Also by postcard dated July 20, 2015, we notified appellants the docketing statement had not been filed in this case. We directed appellants to file the docketing statement within ten days. We cautioned appellants that failure to do so might result in dismissal of this appeal. To date, appellants have not paid the filing fee, filed the docketing statement, responded to notifications regarding the reporter’s record, or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c). /David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE 150875F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT ROWENA REYES AND ALL OCCUPANTS, Appellants No. 05-15-00875-CV On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-15-02674-B. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. Justices Francis and Myers participating. V. WELLS FARGO BANK NA, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. We ORDER that appellee Wells Fargo Bank NA recover its costs, if any, of this appeal from appellants Rowena Reyes and All Occupants. Judgment entered November 4, 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.