i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION
No. 04-08-00779- CV Kr ist of e r T ho ma s K

AST NE R , Appellant
v . MARTIN & DROUG HT, P.C. f/k/a Mar tin, Droug ht, I nc. and f

/k/a Martin, Droug ht & Tor

res, Inc., Ge rald T. Dr oug ht & Da in A. Dre y er ,

Appellee s Fr om the 57th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CI -12370 Honora ble Michae l Peden, J udg e Presiding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: April 8, 2009 MOTI ON F OR EXTENSI ON OF TI ME TO PAY F I L I NG F EE DENI ED AND APPEAL DI SMI SSED When appellant Kr istofer Thomas Kastner filed this appeal, he was re quired to pay a $175.00 filing f ee. See T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE ANN . § § 5 1. 20 7(b) (1 ), 51 .9 41 (a ) ( Ve rn on 20 05 ); id. §§ 51.208, 51 .0 05 1 (V erno n S up p. 20 08 ); T EX A S S UPREME C OU R T O R D ER R EG AR DI NG F EE S C HAR GE D I N C IV IL C A SES I

N TH E S UPREME C OURT AND T HE C O U RT S O F A PP EA L S AND B EF ORE THE J U D I CI A L P ANE L ON04
- 08
- 00 77 9- CV

- 2- M UL TI DI S TR I C T L I TI GATI ON (Misc. Docket No. 07-9138, Aug . 28, 2007) § B .1.(a)
. Ap pe lla nt d id
no t pa y the re qu ir e d f

ili ng fe e . I ns te a d, on No ve mbe r 1 2, 20 08 , a pp e lla nt f ile d a n unti me ly

a ff ida vit of ina bil ity to p ay c os ts a nd a mot ion to e xten d tim e to fi le the a ff ida vit . We g ra

nte d th e mot ion

to extend tim e to file the a ffidavit and e ntere d an o rd er re q u i ring the trial cour t clerk to file the aff idavit. See H

iggins v. Randall Count

y Sheriff 's Off ice , 193 S.W .3d 898, 899-900 (Te x . 2006). After the af fidavit was f

iled in the trial court, a

ppellees, the trial court c lerk, a nd the cour

t reporte r filed contests to appellant’ s aff idavit of inability

to pay
. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 0. 1( e ). Ap pe lle e s a lso asked the trial court to f

ind the appea l f

rivolous. F ollowing a

hear ing, the trial court sustained the contests and f

ound the appe al frivolous. Appe llant appea led t h e i ndige ncy order and we order ed appellant a

nd appellee s to file briefs, w hich they did. After revie wing the briefs, we held the t rial court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the contests, finding there was evidence appellant could pay the costs of appeal “if he rea lly wanted to and made a good faith eff ort to do so[.] ” Kas tne r v . M ar tin & Dr ou

gh t, P .C. , No. 04-08-00779- CV, 200 9 W L 6 1 8 6 98, at *3 (Te x . App.–San Antonio Mar. 11, 2009, no pe t. h.) (mem. op.) (i nte rl oc uto ry

op ini on on a pp e a l of or de r s us ta ini ngcon tes ts to a ff ida vit of ina bil ity to p ay c os ts) (c i t i n g Higgins v. Randall County Sheriff’s Office , 257 S.W .3d 684, 6 8 6 (T ex . 2 008) (quoting Pi nc hb ac k

v . H oc k le ss , 1 39 Te x. 53 6, 16 4 S. W.2 d 1 9, 20 (1 94 2) ). We al so he ld the re wa s n o a bu se in finding the appea l frivolous. Acc ording ly , we a ffirme d the orde r sustaining the contests and finding the appe al frivolous and held appellant “wa s not e ntitled to proce ed in this appea l without advanc e pay

ment of costs, including pay ment of the filing fee .” Kastner , 2009 WL 618698, at *3.04
- 08
- 00 77 9- CV

- 3- On the same day we is su ed o ur int e rl oc uto ry

op ini on on ind ig e nc y

and fr ivo lity , w e a lso issued an orde r in which we order ed appe llant “t o pay the filing fee of $175.00 to this court on or befor e Mar ch 26, 2009,” or risk dismiss al for w ant of prose cution. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3. Rather than paying the filing fee , appellant filed a motion to extend time to pa y the filing fee . I n his moti on,
and c on tr ary to the tr ia l c ourt ’s fi nd ing and thi s c ourt ’s int e rl oc uto ry op ini on , a pp e lla nt sti ll i ns ist s he “ha s no means of pa

ying the $175 filing f

ee.” He does not provide the cour t with any information
or a da te by wh ic h h e mig ht b e a

ble to p ro vid e pa

y me nt, no r d id h e pr ov ide e ve n a pa rt ia l pa y me nt. The filing fee has not bee n paid and appellant has provided no excuse for non- pay ment other than his inability

to pay , which has a lrea dy been r ejec ted by

this co urt. We theref

ore de ny appellant’ s motion for ext ension of time to pay the filing fee , and order this appeal dismissed for want of pr osecution. We furthe r order appellant to bea r all costs of this appe al.

PER C URI AM