Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield v. Clear Lake Nissan and Santander Consumer USA, Inc. Appeal from 333rd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued July 7, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00207-CV ——————————— PROPHET RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, Appellant V. CLEAR LAKE NISSAN AND SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Appellees On Appeal from the 333rd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2015-22666 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, proceeding pro se, has neither paid the required filing fee nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1; see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041(1) (West Supp. 2015), § 101.0411 (West Supp. 2015); Order, Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). Further, appellant has neither paid nor made arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). After being notified by the Court’s Order and Notice of Intent to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution, issued on April 26, 2016, that this appeal was subject to dismissal for failure to pay the required fees, appellant did not adequately respond. See id. 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees and for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). We dismiss all pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Huddle. 2
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.
