Aarion J. Cunningham and in the Interest of A. T., a Child v. Office of the Attorney General
This text of Aarion J. Cunningham and in the Interest of A. T., a Child v. Office of the Attorney General (Aarion J. Cunningham and in the Interest of A. T., a Child v. Office of the Attorney General) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NO. 12-23-00235-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS
AARION J. CUNNINGHAM AND IN § APPEAL FROM THE THE INTEREST OF A. T., A CHILD, APPELLANT
V. § COUNTY COURT AT LAW
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, APPELLEE § CHEROKEE COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM
This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Aarion J. Cunningham, acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal on August 24, 2023. On September 8, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the notice of appeal failed to contain the information specifically required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and Section 51.017(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5 (service); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.017(a) (West Supp. 2019) (notice of appeal must be served on each court reporter responsible for preparing reporter’s record). The notice warned that, unless Appellant filed a proper notice of appeal on or before October 9, the appeal would be referred to the Court for dismissal. This deadline passed and Appellant has not filed a compliant notice of appeal or otherwise responded to this Court’s notice.
1 Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.). Because Appellant failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 9.5 and Section 51.017(a), the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (on its own initiative after giving ten days’ notice to all parties, appellate court may dismiss appeal if appeal is subject to dismissal because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of these rules, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time).
Opinion delivered October 18, 2023. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
2 COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT
OCTOBER 18, 2023
AARION J. CUNNINGHAM AND IN THE INTEREST OF A. T., A CHILD, Appellant V. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Appellee
Appeal from the County Court at Law of Cherokee County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. FM2300146)
THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that the appeal should be dismissed.
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.
By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Aarion J. Cunningham and in the Interest of A. T., a Child v. Office of the Attorney General, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aarion-j-cunningham-and-in-the-interest-of-a-t-a-child-v-office-of-the-texapp-2023.