Oscar Dean Davis v. Walter Earl Stephenson, Sr.--Appeal from County Court at Law of Cass County (majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________ No. 06-11-00073-CV ______________________________ OSCAR DEAN DAVIS, Appellant V. WALTER EARL STEPHENSON, SR., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law Cass County, Texas Trial Court No. CCL-11-C-167 Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter MEMORANDUM OPINION Oscar Dean Davis, appellant, filed his notice of appeal July 20, 2011. Davis filed a motion to extend time to complete appeal, which this Court granted to September 21 for the filing of the record. Davis is not indigent and is therefore responsible for payment of the clerk s record and reporter s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. app. C (B)(1); 20.1. The clerk s record was due on September 21, 2011. There is no information to indicate Davis has made efforts to have the clerk s record filed with this Court. On October 21, 2011, we contacted Davis by letter, giving him an opportunity to cure the various defects, and warning him that if we did not receive an adequate response within ten days, this appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c). On September 23, 2011, we received Davis brief in this matter, which we returned to him, explaining that the clerk s record had not been filed and that his brief would be due thirty days after the clerk s record had been filed. Appellate courts must base their decisions on the record as made and brought forward, not on a record that should have been made or that could have been made. Mar. Overseas Corp. v. Ellis, 971 S.W.2d 402, 407 (Tex. 1998). Although the jurisdiction of a court of appeals is invoked by timely filing documents showing a bona fide intent to appeal, see Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616 (Tex. 1997), we cannot decide a case without an adequate record, and with no clerk s record, we have nothing to review, and therefore we cannot find error. 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Jack Carter Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: November 29, 2011 November 30, 2011 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.
