## NUMBER 13 -22-00344-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

JOHN ERIC PENA AND CRISTINA F. PENA , Appellant s,

v. EDINBURG CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, HIDALGO COUNTY, CITY OF EDINBURG, SOUTH TEXAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, HIDALGO COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT #01, HIDALGO COUNTY IRRIGATION DISTRICT #01, AND SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGE , Appellee s.
On appeal from the 332 nd District Court of Hidalgo C ounty, Texas.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides On January 22, 2021, appellants John Eric Pena and Cristina F. Pena a/k/a2 Cristina Fortenberry Pena filed a notice of appeal regarding a judgment rendered against them for court costs and abstractor ’ s fees in a suit for delinquent ad valorem taxes filed by appellees, Edinburg Consolidated Independent School District, Hidalgo County, City

o f Edinburg, South Texas Independent School District, Hidalgo County Drainage District #01, Hidalgo County Irrigation District #01, a nd South Texas College

. Th e appellants’ notice of appeal was not filed in this Court until July 25, 2022. On Ju ly 25 , 2 0 22, the Clerk of this Court requested appellant s to remit the $205.00 filing fee for the appeal within ten days. See T EX

. R. A PP

. 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. ” ); T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 51.207 ( delineating the required fees and costs in an appellate court ). The Clerk also advis ed appellant s that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5(e) and requested correction of this defect. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.5(e). Appellant s did not pay the filing fee for the appeal or correct the defect in the notice of appeal

. On August 18, 2022, the Clerk notified appellant s that they were delinquent in paying the filing fee for the appeal . The Clerk advised appellant s that the appeal would be dismissed if the filing fee was not paid within ten days. See id. R. 42.3(c). The Clerk again advised appellants that the notice of appeal failed to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5(e), requested correction of this defect, and advised appellants that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was no t cured. See id. R. 9.5(e).3 Nevertheless, a ppellant s did not pay the filing fee for the appeal or correct the defect in their notice of appeal

. The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal and subsequent events, is of the opinion th at this appeal should be dismissed. This Court 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 T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4 2.3(c); Smith v. DC Civil Constr., LLC , 521 S.W.3d 75, 76 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2017, no pet.). Here, appellant has not paid the appellate filing fee or otherwise responded to the Clerk ’ s directives. Accordingly, w e dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 42.3 (b), (c)

.
GINA M. BENAVIDES Justice Delivered and filed on the 15th day of September , 202 2

.