R. Wayne Johnson v. Stephen Marsh
This text of R. Wayne Johnson v. Stephen Marsh (R. Wayne Johnson v. Stephen Marsh) 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 SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 02-13-00406-CV
R. WAYNE JOHNSON APPELLANT
V.
STEPHEN MARSH APPELLEE
----------
FROM THE 158TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
Appellant, who has been determined to be a vexatious litigant subject to a
pre-filing order under section 11.101(a) of the civil practice and remedies code, 2
1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2 We take judicial notice of the list maintained by the Office of Court Administration at http://www.txcourts.gov/oca/vexatiouslitigants.asp. See Merritt v. Davis, No. 05-13-00819-CV, 2013 WL 4459024, at *1 n.1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 19, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.); Douglas v. Am. Title Co., 196 S.W.3d 876, 878 n.2 (Tex. App.––Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). is attempting to appeal from a trial court order dismissing his suit for failure to
obtain a pre-filing order from the local administrative judge. Tex. Civ. Prac. &
Rem. Code Ann. § 11.101(a) (West Supp. 2013). Likewise, appellant has failed
to obtain a pre-filing order before filing this appeal, despite our January 13, 2014
notice giving him ten days to obtain such an order or face dismissal. See id.
§ 11.103(a) (West Supp. 2013).
Section 11.103(a) of the civil practice and remedies code provides that “a
clerk of a court may not file a litigation, original proceeding, appeal, or other claim
presented, pro se, by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order under
Section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the appropriate local
administrative judge . . . permitting the filing.” Id. Appellant failed to obtain a pre-
filing order from the local administrative judge before filing this appeal; he also
failed to obtain such an order after notice from this court. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal. See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c); In re Johnson, No. 03-14-
00006-CV, 2014 WL 411763, at *1 (Tex. App.––Austin Jan. 31, 2014, orig.
proceeding) (mem. op.); Kastner v. Fulco, No. 01-13-00100-CV, 2013 WL
6157392, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 21, 2013, no pet.) (mem.
op.); Merritt v. Davis, No. 05-13-00819-CV, 2013 WL 4459024, at *1 (Tex. App.—
Dallas Aug. 19, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.); Minnfee v. Currietu, No. 13-13-00246-
CV, 2013 WL 2949348, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi June 13, 2013, no pet.)
(mem. op.); Scott v. Morgan, Nos. 14-12-00268-CV, 14-12-00269-CV, 2013 WL
2149805, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] May 16, 2013, no pet.) (mem.
2 op.); Minnfee v. Williams, No. 09-12-00328-CV, 2012 WL 4713721, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Beaumont Oct. 4, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.).
PER CURIAM
PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and GARDNER, JJ.
DELIVERED: March 13, 2014
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
R. Wayne Johnson v. Stephen Marsh, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-wayne-johnson-v-stephen-marsh-texapp-2014.