Everett Chad Evans (Owner), Individually, Nolana Smiles, PLLC D/B/A Smile Magic of McAllen, and Dr. Nicole Guito v. Nathan Saenz, Ashley Saenz, Individually and A/N/F Parker Saenz, a Minor

NUMBER 13-26-00253-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

EVERETT CHAD EVANS (OWNER),
INDIVIDUALLY, NOLANA SMILES, PLLC
D/B/A SMILE MAGIC OF MCALLEN,
AND DR. NICOLE GUITO, Appellants,

v.

NATHAN SAENZ, ASHLEY SAENZ,
INDIVIDUALLY AND A/N/F
PARKER SAENZ, A MINOR, Appellees.

ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 5
OF HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices West and Cron
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Tijerina

On March 24, 2026, appellants filed a notice of appeal attempting to appeal an

order or judgment in trial court cause number CL-25-3980-E. On April 2, 2026, the Clerk
of the Court requested that appellants pay the $205.00 filing fee for the notice of appeal

within ten days. See TEX. R. APP. 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.”); TEX. GOV’T CODE § 51.207 (delineating the required

fees and costs in an appellate court). Also on April 2, 2026, the Clerk of the Court notified

appellants that it appears there is no final, appealable order. Appellants were further

notified that if the defect was not cured within ten days, the appeal would be dismissed.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3.

On April 28, 2026, the Clerk of the Court notified appellants that they were

delinquent in submitting the filing fee for the appeal and informed them that the appeal

would be dismissed if the filing fee was not paid within 10 days from the date of the notice.

See id. R. 42.3(c). To date, appellants have failed to pay the filing fee for the notice of

appeal or otherwise respond to the clerk’s notices. This Court has the authority to dismiss

an appeal because the appellants have 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 id. R. 42.3(b), (c); Smith v. DC Civil Constr., LLC, 521

S.W.3d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2017, no pet.). Here, appellants have not paid

the appellate filing fee nor responded to other notices as required. Accordingly, we

dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b), (c).

JAIME TIJERINA
Chief Justice
Delivered and filed on the
21st day of May, 2026.

2