Springstun — Appeal dismissed for failure to pay for the clerk’s record

Case
Eric Springstun v. The Wharf at Clear Lake Slip Maintenance Association, Inc., Nathan Alexander, Stacy Caston, Robert Trgovich, Kurt Lotero, Nasser Hempel, and John Oleyar
Court
Texas Ninth Court of Appeals
Judge
Golemon (elected 2021); Johnson (Rick Perry, 2013)
Date Decided
July 30, 2026
Docket No.
09-25-00296-CV
Topics
Appellate Procedure; Want of Prosecution; Clerk’s Record
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Eric Springstun appealed from the 284th District Court in Montgomery County. The district clerk notified the appellate court that Springstun was not entitled to proceed without paying the required $435 fee and had neither paid nor arranged to pay for preparation of the clerk’s record.

After the record’s June 12, 2026 due date passed, the appellate clerk warned that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution unless Springstun provided proof of satisfactory payment arrangements or reasonably explained why additional time was needed. Springstun filed a motion on July 13 requesting a seven-day extension to complete payment arrangements. On July 16, he reported that he had filed an amended designation of the clerk’s record and was awaiting notice of its cost, but he never showed that he paid the district clerk to prepare the record.

The Court’s Holding

The court concluded that the clerk’s record had not been filed because Springstun failed to pay the preparation fee. It further determined that he had received a reasonable opportunity to cure the deficiency before dismissal.

Relying on Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 37.3(b), 42.3(c), and 43.2(f), the court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The per curiam opinion did not address the merits of Springstun’s underlying claims.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellant who has not established indigent status must pay or make satisfactory arrangements to pay for preparation of the clerk’s record.
  • Failure to secure the clerk’s record after notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure can support dismissal for want of prosecution.
  • Springstun requested a seven-day extension, but the opinion does not state that the court granted it.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that responsibility for assembling the appellate record rests with the appellant when nonpayment prevents the trial-court clerk from filing it. An amended record designation or pending request for an extension does not, by itself, establish that the required payment arrangements have been made.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top