Henderson — Appeal dismissed for failure to pay for the clerk’s record and follow the court clerk’s directive

Case
Dency Henderson v. Sure Trac of Texas, Inc.
Court
Texas Tenth Court of Appeals
Judge
Chief Justice Johnson; Justice Smith; Justice Harris
Date Decided
August 20, 2026
Docket No.
10-26-00238-CV
Topics
Appellate Procedure; Want of Prosecution; Appellate Record
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Dency Henderson appealed a trial-court judgment signed on March 27, 2026. A post-trial motion extended the deadline for filing the appellate record to July 27, 2026. Henderson’s docketing statement indicated that he had neither requested nor made payment arrangements for the clerk’s record or reporter’s record.

On June 26, 2026, the appellate clerk directed Henderson to arrange payment for the clerk’s record and verify compliance by July 6. The clerk warned that failure to do so could result in dismissal for want of prosecution. Henderson was also instructed to designate the contents of the reporter’s record, arrange payment, and verify compliance by the same date.

Henderson provided neither requested verification. The trial-court clerk reported that its bill remained unpaid as of August 3, and the court reporter reported that Henderson had neither designated the requested materials nor arranged payment.

The Court’s Holding

The Tenth Court of Appeals dismissed Henderson’s appeal for want of prosecution and failure to follow a directive from the appellate clerk under Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 42.3(b) and 42.3(c).

The court explained that the appeal could not proceed without the clerk’s record. Because Henderson failed to arrange payment for that necessary record despite notice and a warning of possible dismissal, dismissal was warranted.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellant must timely request and arrange payment for the clerk’s record when it is required for the appeal.
  • Failure to comply with an appellate clerk’s directive may support dismissal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c).
  • An appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution when the appellant’s inaction prevents preparation of the appellate record.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that perfecting an appeal is not enough to keep it pending. An appellant must also complete the procedural and financial steps necessary to assemble the record, particularly after receiving an express directive and dismissal warning from the appellate court.

✉️ 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