Colette Woodards v. Option One Mortgage Co., Et Al--Appeal from County Court at Law No. 4 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. 05-12-01036-CV COLETTE WOODARDS, Appellant V. OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CO., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-03324-D 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 letter dated July 30, 2012, 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 July 30, 2012, 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 121036F.P05 2 S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT COLETTE WOODARDS, Appellant No. 05-12-01036-CV On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-12-03324-D. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis participating. V. OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CO., Appellee In accordance with this Court s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CO. recover its costs of this appeal from appellant COLETTE WOODARDS. 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.