Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 21, 2025
Docket08-25-00161-CV
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Mark Bryan Jensen v. Forrest Edmund Ely, II, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

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

Bluebook (online)
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.