Johnny Carroll, Individually, and as Executor of the Ray Carroll Estate and as Trustee v. Whitney Independent School District--Appeal from 66th District Court of Hill County

Annotate this Case
JOhnny Carroll v. Whitney ISD /**/

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

 

No. 10-02-197-CV

 

JOHNNY CARROLL, INDIVIDUALLY,

AND AS EXECUTOR OF THE

RAY CARROLL ESTATE AND TRUSTEE

OF THE JOHNNY CARROLL TRUST,

Appellant

v.

 

WHITNEY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL

DISTRICT, HILL COUNTY EDUCATION

DISTRICT, CITY OF WHITNEY,

AND HILL COUNTY

Appellees

 

From the 66th District Court

Hill County, Texas

Trial Court # 7970-A

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellees obtained a post-answer default judgment against Johnny Ray Carroll and others in a tax delinquency foreclosure suit. Carroll appealed in his individual capacity and as executor of the Estate of Ray K. Carroll, deceased, and trustee of the Johnny Carroll Trust.

The court signed the judgment on February 14, 2002. Carroll filed his notice of appeal on June 24. Because Carroll did not participate in the trial on the merits, we have determined to treat this as a restricted appeal under Rule of Appellate Procedure 30. See Tex. R. App. P. 30; Taylor v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 93, 96 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.).

Because Carroll filed his notice of appeal on June 24, the record was due on July 24. The trial court clerk informed us by letter dated June 27 that Carroll had failed to make the necessary arrangements for the filing of the clerk s record. We notified him by July 3 letter that this appeal would be dismissed if he failed to pay the clerk s fee for preparation of the record or make arrangements for payment of that fee. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 42.3, 44.3. He has failed to comply. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Id. 37.3(b).

 

PER CURIAM

 

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Gray

Dismissed for want of prosecution

Opinion delivered and filed August 21, 2002

Do not publish

[CV06]

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.