Newell M. Evans, III v. Guaranteed Transmissions--Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No 1 of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-02-0166-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL A MAY 9, 2002 ______________________________ NEWELL M. EVANS, APPELLANT V. GUARANTEED TRANSMISSIONS, ET AL., APPELLEES _________________________________ FROM THE COUNTY CIVIL COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF HARRIS COUNTY; NO. 755916; HONORABLE ED LANDRY, JUDGE _______________________________ Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ. On February 21, 2002 a Notice of Appeal was filed by appellant Newell M. Evans, III. By letters dated March 14 and March 20, 2002 the clerk advised appellant that a filing fee had not been received, TEX . R. APP . P. 5. By letter dated April 12, 2002, the clerk advised appellant that the filing fee had still not been paid, and that unless the filing fee was received on or before April 23, 2002, the appeal would be subject to dismissal. Texas courts do not maintain separate sets of procedural rules for litigants with counsel and for litigants representing themselves. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978) (Rules of Civil Procedure). Litigants representing themselves must comply with the same procedural rules as are applicable to represented parties. Id. Appellant has not complied with the Rules of Appellate Procedure in regard to his appeal, as noted above. The appeal is dismissed pursuant to TEX . R. APP . P. 42.3(c) for appellant s failure to comply with TEX . R. APP . P. 20.1 and the subsequent direction of the clerk to pay the filing fee. Per Curiam Do not publish. 2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.
