Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II
This text of Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II (Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II) 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
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS
§ MARK BRYAN JENSEN, No. 08-25-00161-CV § Appellant, Appeal from the § v. Probate Court No. 1 § FORREST EDMUND ELY, II, of El Paso County, Texas § Appellee. (TC# 2024-CPR00144) §
ME MO RAN DU M O PI N I O N
Concluding that Appellant, Mark Bryan Jensen, made a bona fide attempt to invoke our
appellate jurisdiction, we construed his pro se filings as a defective notice of appeal and ordered
him to file an amended notice complying with the rules of appellate procedure no later than
July 30, 2025.1 In our order, we cautioned Jensen that failure to timely file an amended notice
could result in dismissal of his appeal for failure to comply with an order of this Court or for failure
to comply with the rules of procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).
1 The order specified that “The amended notice of appeal must be filed with the trial court clerk, with a copy provided to the Clerk of this Court; it must include both the trial court cause number, 2024-CPR00144, and this Court’s cause number, 08-25-00161-CV, in the caption; and it must be served on all parties to the trial court proceeding and on each court reporter responsible for preparing a reporter’s record . . . [and] must also comply with Rule 25.1(d).” See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(d). As of the date of this memorandum opinion, Jensen has not filed an amended notice of
appeal.2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f). All pending motions
are denied as moot.
MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice
August 21, 2025
Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
2 On July 3, 2025, Jensen submitted an amended notice of appeal, but because the document did not comply with Rule 25.1(d), the Clerk of this Court rejected the document and asked that he resubmit a compliant version no later than the July 30, 2025 deadline. Jensen did not attempt to resubmit the amended notice.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mark-bryan-jensen-v-forrest-edmund-ely-ii-texapp-2025.