Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward Bravenec, and The Law Office of Mcknight and Bravenec Appeal from 285th 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. 04-14-00483-CV Rowland MARTIN, Jr., Appellant v. Edward BRAVENEC and Law Office and Edward BRAVENEC and The Law Office of McKnight and Bravenec, Appellees From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014-CI-07644 Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2014 DISMISSED After this appeal was abated to the trial court to consider an affidavit of indigence filed by appellant in this appeal, the trial court entered an order granting the contests to appellant s affidavit and finding that the appellant is not indigent. On August 26, 2014, appellant filed a third supplemental notice of appeal which this court construed as a motion for review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(j)(1). By order dated August 27, 2014, this court denied appellant s motion for review and ordered appellant to file written proof by September 19, 2014, establishing that he had paid or made arrangements to pay the fees for the preparation of the clerk s record and reporter s record 04-14-00483-CV for this appeal. Our order stated that if appellant failed to file written proof within the time provided, this appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). On September 18, 2014, appellant filed a Motion to Rehear in Part and to Abate in Part Pursuant to the Texas Citizen s Participation Act. Appellant s motion is denied. Because appellant failed to file written proof of record payment in accordance with this court s prior order, this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b-c). 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.