What does this decision mean?

The court ended the appeal because the appellant did not pay or arrange payment for the clerk's record and did not respond to the court's notice. The trial court's judgment stands unless the dismissal is successfully challenged.

Who is affected by this decision?

The appellant, Kenneth Steven Isbell, is directly affected because his appeal was dismissed; Frost Bank is affected insofar as the appeal is no longer pending.

What happens to pending motions?

The opinion states that any pending motions were dismissed as moot.

Can this be appealed or undone?

A dismissal for want of prosecution can sometimes be challenged by filing a motion for reinstatement or other appropriate relief in the appellate court, but relief is discretionary and time-limited; the appellant should consult counsel immediately.

Kenneth Steven Isbell v. Frost Bank

Docket 01-25-00977-CV

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilDismissed

Filed: Apr 7, 2026 · 3 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Texas
Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Type: Lead Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Dismissed
Docket: 01-25-00977-CV

Appeal from the 133rd District Court, Harris County (trial court case no. 2025-14600) dismissed for want of prosecution

Summary

The First District of Texas dismissed Kenneth Steven Isbell’s appeal from a Harris County district court because he failed to pay or arrange payment for the clerk’s record fee and did not respond to the court’s notice that the appeal was subject to dismissal. The court cited Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring payment or arrangement and dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, also denying as moot any pending motions. The decision was issued as a brief memorandum opinion by a three-justice panel.

Issues Decided

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for failure to pay or arrange payment for the clerk's record as required by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
Whether dismissal for want of prosecution is appropriate after the appellant fails to respond to a court notice about potential dismissal

Court's Reasoning

The court relied on Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.3(b) which requires payment or arrangements to pay for the clerk's record. The appellant neither paid nor made arrangements and did not respond to the court's notice that the appeal could be dismissed. Given those procedural failures, dismissal for want of prosecution was appropriate and any pending motions were rendered moot.

Authorities Cited

Texas Rules of Appellate ProcedureTEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b)(c)

Parties

Appellant: Kenneth Steven Isbell
Appellee: Frost Bank
Judge: Chief Justice Adams
Judge: Justice Guerra
Judge: Justice Guiney

Key Dates

Opinion issued: 2026-04-07

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult an attorney immediately
Get advice on whether to seek reinstatement of the appeal or other post- dismissal relief and on applicable deadlines.
2
Consider filing a motion for reinstatement
If eligible, prepare and file a motion explaining the failure to pay or arrange payment, provide proof of payment or arrangements, and request reinstatement without undue delay.
3
Review appellate rules and deadlines
Confirm any procedural deadlines for motions to reinstate or other relief under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure to avoid forfeiting further options.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this decision mean?: The court ended the appeal because the appellant did not pay or arrange payment for the clerk's record and did not respond to the court's notice. The trial court's judgment stands unless the dismissal is successfully challenged.
Who is affected by this decision?: The appellant, Kenneth Steven Isbell, is directly affected because his appeal was dismissed; Frost Bank is affected insofar as the appeal is no longer pending.
What happens to pending motions?: The opinion states that any pending motions were dismissed as moot.
Can this be appealed or undone?: A dismissal for want of prosecution can sometimes be challenged by filing a motion for reinstatement or other appropriate relief in the appellate court, but relief is discretionary and time-limited; the appellant should consult counsel immediately.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Opinion issued April 7, 2026




                                       In The

                               Court of Appeals
                                      For The

                           First District of Texas
                             ————————————
                               NO. 01-25-00977-CV
                            ———————————
                   KENNETH STEVEN ISBELL, Appellant
                                         V.
                             FROST BANK, Appellee


                    On Appeal from the 133rd District Court
                             Harris County, Texas
                       Trial Court Case No. 2025-14600


                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant has neither paid nor made arrangements to pay the fee for preparing

the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b). After being notified that this appeal

was subject to dismissal, appellant failed to respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b),
42.3(b) (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. We dismiss

any pending motions as moot.

                                 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Guiney.




                                        2