Live courthouse data across 10 states. Pro users get alerted instantly on every filing. Get started

Ray Jackson v. BOKF, NA DBA Bank of Texas

Docket 01-25-01090-CV

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

CivilDismissed
Filed
Jurisdiction
Texas
Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Type
Lead Opinion
Case type
Civil
Disposition
Dismissed
Docket
01-25-01090-CV

Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2 in Harris County, Texas, dismissed for want of prosecution

Summary

The Court of Appeals dismissed Ray Jackson's appeal for want of prosecution because Jackson did not establish indigence, did not pay for or arrange payment for the clerk's record, and failed to respond to the court's notice that dismissal was possible. The court invoked the appellate rules permitting dismissal when the clerk's record is not filed due to the appellant's fault and when an appellant fails to prosecute the appeal. All pending motions were dismissed as moot.

Issues Decided

  • Whether the appellant established indigence or otherwise arranged payment for the clerk’s record
  • Whether the appeal may be dismissed under Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure for failure to file the clerk’s record due to the appellant’s fault
  • Whether dismissal is appropriate where the appellant failed to respond to the court's notice and did not prosecute the appeal

Court's Reasoning

The court applied Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure allowing dismissal when an appellant fails to establish indigence or pay for the clerk’s record and fails to respond to a notice that the appeal may be dismissed. Because Jackson neither established indigence nor paid or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record and did not respond to the court’s notice, the failure to file the record was attributable to his fault. That failure and lack of response justified dismissal for want of prosecution.

Authorities Cited

  • Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 5
  • Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 20.1
  • Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 37.3(b)
  • Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure Rules 42.3(b)–(c)

Parties

Appellant
Ray Jackson
Appellee
BOKF, NA d/b/a Bank of Texas
Judge
Per Curiam (Chief Justice Adams; Justices Guerra and Guiney)

Key Dates

Opinion issued
2026-04-21

What You Should Do Next

  1. 1

    Consult an attorney promptly

    Speak with appellate counsel to determine whether there are grounds to seek reinstatement of the appeal or other relief and to assess deadlines for any motion to reinstate.

  2. 2

    Consider motion to reinstate

    If there is a good cause (for example, reasonable explanation for failure to pay or respond), prepare and file a motion to reinstate the appeal as permitted by appellate rules, including supporting evidence and affidavit.

  3. 3

    Arrange clerk's record payment if reinstated

    If reinstatement is possible, promptly pay for or make arrangements to pay for the clerk's record, or establish indigence under the applicable rule, to avoid dismissal repeating.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this decision mean?
The appellate court ended the appeal because the appellant did not provide or arrange payment for the clerk's record and did not respond to the court's notice, so the appeal cannot proceed.
Who is affected by the dismissal?
The appellant, Ray Jackson, is directly affected because his appeal has been dismissed; the appellee, Bank of Texas, is no longer defending the appeal.
What happens to pending motions?
The court dismissed any pending motions as moot, meaning they no longer have effect because the appeal was dismissed.
Can this be appealed further?
A party may seek further relief only through applicable post-judgment procedures; because this is an appellate dismissal for failure to prosecute, available options are limited and would typically require showing a valid reason to reinstate the appeal.

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 21, 2026




                                       In The

                               Court of Appeals
                                      For The

                           First District of Texas
                             ————————————
                               NO. 01-25-01090-CV
                            ———————————
                           RAY JACKSON, Appellant
                                         V.
                BOKF, NA D/B/A BANK OF TEXAS, Appellee


             On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2
                           Harris County, Texas
                       Trial Court Case No. 1221766


                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Ray Jackson has not established indigence, and has neither paid for

nor made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 20.1

(indigence), 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of appeal if no clerk’s record filed due to

appellant’s fault). Appellant also failed to respond to our notice that his appeal was
subject to dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b) (allowing dismissal of appeal if no

clerk’s record filed due to appellant’s fault), 42.3(b)–(c) (allowing involuntary

dismissal of case).

      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