In Re C.J.G. v. the State of Texas
This text of In Re C.J.G. v. the State of Texas (In Re C.J.G. v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ————————————
No. 08-26-00084-CV ————————————
In re C.J.G., Appellant 1
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 6 El Paso County, Texas Trial Court No. 2025DCV4130
M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N
On February 9, 2026, Appellant filed a document in this Court, in which she indicates that
the purpose of her submission is in response to a “Notice of Dismissal for Want of Prosecution.”
In the document, Appellant requests an “opportunity to be heard in camera” and “an in camera
review in equity.” Appellant states that her “request is not brought as a complaint at law, but as a
petition in equity.”
1 Nothing in this Court’s records identifies an appellee in this case. We have therefore styled the case as In re C.J.G. On February 13, 2026, we issued an order notifying Appellant that, to the extent we
construed her filing as a notice of appeal, (1) nothing in her notice indicated if or when the trial
court had issued an appealable order, (2) nothing in the notice showed that we have jurisdiction
over her attempted appeal, and (3) her notice failed to comply with the applicable rules of appellate
procedure, including the requirement that she pay the fee for filing a notice of appeal. We further
notified Appellant that, to the extent she was attempting to file a petition seeking extraordinary
relief, her petition failed to show how we have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief and failed
to comply with the applicable rules of appellate procedure. We ordered Appellant to file a written
response by February 23, 2026, that either complied with the applicable rules of appellate
procedure related to filing a notice of appeal and that demonstrated how we have jurisdiction over
an appeal from a ruling of the trial court, or that complied with the applicable rules of appellate
procedure for filing a petition seeking extraordinary relief. Appellant did not respond.
To the extent Appellant attempts to appeal from a ruling of the trial court, we dismiss this
appeal for want of jurisdiction, for failure to pay the filing fee, for failure to comply with a
requirement of the rules of appellate procedure, and for failure to comply with a court order. See
Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), (c). To the extent Appellant attempts to seek extraordinary relief through
the filing of an original proceeding in this Court, we deny her petition. See In re Hernandez, No.
08-23-00160-CV, 2023 WL 4146281, at *1 (Tex. App.—El Paso June 23, 2023, orig. proceeding)
(mem. op.); In re Vasquez, No. 08-12-00267-CV, 2012 WL 4714492, at *1 (Tex. App.—El Paso
Oct. 3, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice
March 2, 2026
Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re C.J.G. v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cjg-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp8-2026.