Timothy Dewayne Offord v. Joe L. Cuellar, Sr., Et al.Appeal from 37th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00203-CV Timothy Dewayne OFFORD, Appellant v. Joe L. CUELLAR Sr., Matilda Cuellar, and Joe Louis Cuellar Jr., Appellees From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2010CI03352 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 4, 2014 DISMISSED When Timothy D. Offord filed this appeal, he was required to pay a $195.00 filing fee. See TEXAS SUPREME COURT ORDER REGARDING FEES CHARGED IN CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT AND THE COURTS OF APPEALS AND BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION (Misc. Docket No. 13-9127, Aug. 16, 2013). Because Offord did not pay the filing fee, the clerk of this court notified him by letter dated March 26, 2014, that his notice of appeal was conditionally filed and the filing fee was due no later than April 9, 2014. 04-14-00203-CV In addition, the trial court clerk filed a notification of late record, stating that the clerk s record, which was due May 5, had not been filed because Offord had not paid or made arrangements to pay the clerk s fee to prepare the record and is not entitled to the record without paying the fee. On May 9, 2014, we therefore ordered Offord to either (1) provide written proof to this court that he is indigent or otherwise excused from prepaying fees and costs or (2) pay the appellate filing fee and provide written proof that he has paid or made arrangements to pay the clerk s fee for preparing the record. Our order advised Offord that if he failed to file a satisfactory response to our order by May 19, 2014, his appeal would be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(c). Offord has not paid the appellate filing fee or filed any response to our May 9, 2014 order. We therefore dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. PER CURIAM -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.
