Darlene C. Amrhein v. Attorney Lennie F. Bollinger, and Worminton & Bollinger Law Firm ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • AFFIRM the Trial Court Order; and Opinion Filed April 1, 2019.
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-18-00567-CV
    DARLENE C. AMRHEIN, Appellant
    V.
    ATTORNEY LENNIE F. BOLLINGER AND
    WORMINTON & BOLLINGER LAW FIRM, Appellees
    On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6
    Collin County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 006-02654-2017
    MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION TO REVIEW TRIAL
    COURT ORDER SUSTAINING CONTEST TO APPELLANT’S
    STATEMENT OF INABILITY TO AFFORD COURT COSTS
    Before Justices Whitehill, Molberg, and Nowell
    Opinion by Justice Molberg
    By order dated February 27, 2019, we construed appellant’s motion “to supplement this
    court record” as requesting, in part, a review of the trial court’s order sustaining the contest to
    appellant’s statement of inability to afford costs. As directed to do so by our February 27th order,
    the trial court clerk and court reporter have filed a record of the trial court proceedings on
    appellant’s claim of indigence. We have reviewed the record and conclude, under the applicable
    abuse-of-discretion standard of review, the contest was correctly sustained. See Basaldua v.
    Hadden, 
    298 S.W.3d 238
    , 241 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2009, no pet.) (per curiam); Donalson v.
    Barr, 
    86 S.W.3d 718
    , 719-20 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.) (per curiam).
    As reflected in the record, the court reporter filed a contest to appellant’s statement, and a
    hearing was held. The parties were notified of the hearing, but appellant failed to appear and failed
    to request a continuance.
    Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 145, which governs statements of inability to afford
    payment of costs, places the burden of proof at a contest hearing on the party who filed the
    statement. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 145(f)(5). Not having appeared at the hearing, appellant failed to
    satisfy her burden of proof, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining the contest.
    See 
    id. Accordingly, we
    affirm the trial court’s order.
    /Ken Molberg/
    KEN MOLBERG
    JUSTICE
    180567NF.P05
    –2–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-18-00567-CV

Filed Date: 4/1/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/2/2019