In re Monty George Stumbaugh Appeal from 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-24-00056-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG IN RE MONTY GEORGE STUMBAUGH ON APPEAL FROM THE 332ND DISTRICT COURT OF HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras On January 25, 2024, appellant Liborio Plata filed a notice of appeal from an order granting a presuit deposition under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 202. The order subject to appeal provides that Monty George Stumbaugh is entitled to take appellant’s deposition “in anticipation of suit.” See id. R. 202.1. On February 2, 2024, the Clerk of this Court advised appellant that it appeared that there was not a final, appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); In re Jorden, 249 S.W.3d 416, 419 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (holding that a ruling on a Rule 202 petition constitutes a final, appealable order “only if [the pre-suit deposition is] sought from someone against whom suit is not anticipated” and is neither final nor appealable when “sought from an anticipated defendant”). The Clerk informed appellant that the appeal would be dismissed if this defect was not cured. The Clerk also requested appellant to pay the $205.00 filing fee for the notice of appeal within ten days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (“A party who is not excused by statute or these rules from paying costs must pay—at the time an item is presented for filing—whatever fees are required by statute or Supreme Court order. The appellate court may enforce this rule by any order that is just.”); TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 51.207 (delineating the required fees and costs in an appellate court). On February 20, 2024, the Clerk notified appellant that he was delinquent in submitted the filing fee for the notice of appeal and informed him that the appeal would be dismissed if the filing fee was not paid. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c). The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. To date, appellant has not responded to the Clerk’s notices, corrected the defect in the appeal, or paid the filing fee for the notice of appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See id. R. 42.3(a), (b), (c). DORI CONTRERAS Chief Justice Delivered and filed on the 21st day of March, 2024. 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.
