Estate of Claire Essing v. the State of Texas
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 13th District
Date FiledJune 18, 2026
Docket13-26-00197-CV
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
NUMBER 13-26-00197-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
ESTATE OF CLAIRE ESSING, DECEASED
ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3
OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices Silva and Cron
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva
Appellant Lena Essing Comstock filed a notice of appeal from an order rendered
in trial court cause number 2024-PR-00469-3 in the County Court at Law Number 3 of
Nueces County, Texas. On April 28, 2026, and again on May 22, 2026, the Clerk of the
Court notified appellant that the clerk’s record in the above cause was originally due on
April 27, 2026; however, the deputy district clerk had notified this Court that appellant
failed to make arrangements for payment of the clerk’s record. The Clerk advised
appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution unless appellant
arranged to pay for the clerk’s record and provided proof of payment to this Court within
ten days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). Appellant did not indicate that she was
entitled to proceed without payment, make arrangements to secure the filing of the clerk’s
record, or otherwise respond to the Clerk’s notices.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure authorize us to dismiss an appeal for
want of prosecution when the appellant has failed to pay or arranged to pay for the
preparation of the clerk’s record unless the appellant is entitled to proceed without
payment of costs. See id. R. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c); In re T.L.R., 391 S.W.3d 669, 669 (Tex.
App.—Dallas 2013, no pet.); Clinton v. Clinton, 198 S.W.3d 444, 444 (Tex. App.—El Paso
2006, no pet.). The Court also has the authority to dismiss an appeal because the
appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or
a notice from the Clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c); Smith v. DC Civil Constr., LLC, 521 S.W.3d 75, 76 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 2017, no pet.).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file and the
foregoing events, is of the opinion that this appeal should be dismissed. The record does
not reflect that appellant has paid for the clerk’s record, arranged to pay for the clerk’s
record, or that appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c).
CLARISSA SILVA
Justice
Delivered and filed on the
18th day of June, 2026.
2