Tyrone W. Arterberry v. Propel Financial Services, LLC Appeal from 101st Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS and Opinion Filed September 1, 2020 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00270-CV TYRONE W. ARTERBERRY, Appellant V. PROPEL FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. TX-19-00101 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Whitehill, and Justice Molberg Opinion by Chief Justice Burns The clerk’s record in this case is past due. By letters dated April 8, 2020 and May 8, 2020, 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, (1) verification of payment or arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record, or (2) written documentation that appellant had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not provided the required documentation, nor 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). /Robert D. Burns, III/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE 200270F.P05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT TYRONE W. ARTERBERRY, Appellant No. 05-20-00270-CV On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. TX-19-00101. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. Justices Whitehill and Molberg participating. V. PROPEL FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Appellee In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee PROPEL FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC recover its costs of this appeal from appellant TYRONE W. ARTERBERRY. Judgment entered September 1, 2020 –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.