Amaro-Fric, Crystal v. Martiniz, Manuel--Appeal from 256th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion by chief justice wright)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS; Opinion issued February 13, 2013 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00703-CV CRYSTAL AMARO-FRIC, Appellant V. MANUEL MARTINIZ, Appellee On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-06-11580 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, and Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The $175 filing fee in this case is overdue. By postcard dated January 23, 2013, we notified appellant the filing fee was due. We directed appellant to pay the fee within ten days and cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal. Also by postcard dated January 23, 2013, we notified appellant the time for filing a docketing statement had expired. We directed appellant to file a docketing statement within ten days and cautioned appellant that failure to do so might result in the dismissal of this appeal. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee, filed a docketing statement, or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b),(c). /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 120703F.P05 2 S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT CRYSTAL AMARO-FRIC, Appellant No. 05-12-00703-CV On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-06-11580. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis participating. V. MANUEL MARTINIZ, Appellee In accordance with this Court s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee MANUEL MARTINIZ recover his costs of this appeal from appellant CRYSTAL AMARO-FRIC. Judgment entered February 13, 2013. /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 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.