Christopher L. Graham v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline Appeal from 193rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed and Opinion Filed April 6, 2018 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01434-CV CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM, Appellant V. COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE, Appellee On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-13821 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Evans, and Justice Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The clerk’s record in this case is past due. By letter dated February 2, 2018, we informed appellant the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for the clerk’s record. We directed appellant to provide, within ten days, written verification of payment or arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or written verification appellant had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so could result in the dismissal of this appeal. Appellant was unable to provide the required documentation and, instead, notified this Court he had filed a motion for a free record in the trial court. On March 26, 2018, appellant further notified this Court that the trial court had denied his motion for a free record, but that he had brought an original proceeding seeking mandamus relief from the trial court’s order. See In Re Christopher Graham, 05-18-00311-CV, 2018 WL 1516838, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 28, 2018, no pet. h.). The mandamus proceeding shows that the trial court denied appellant’s motion for a free record on February 12, 2018. However, appellant did not file his petition for writ of mandamus until March 26, 2018. We denied appellant’s petition “because rule 145(g) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provided [him] with an adequate appellate remedy that he failed to timely pursue.” See id; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 145. (appellant may challenge a ruling that he can afford to pay court costs by filing a motion, within ten days after order is signed, in the appellate court). To date, appellant has neither provided the documentation required by our February 2, 2018 letter nor otherwise adequately responded to that letter. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c). /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE 171434F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM, Appellant No. 05-17-01434-CV On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-13821. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Evans and Brown participating. V. COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee COMMISSION FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINE recover its costs of this appeal from appellant CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM. Judgment entered April 6, 2018. –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.
