From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Carter

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
May 19, 2016
NO. 09-16-00081-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 09-16-00081-CV

05-19-2016

NATHANIEL JONES III, Appellant v. WARDEN CARTER, Appellee


On Appeal from the 60th District Court Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. B-196,422

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 13, 2015, the trial court declared Nathaniel Jones III a vexatious litigant and signed a separate order requiring that Jones obtain a pre-filing order from the local administrative judge before filing any new litigation in any court. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11. 101 (West Supp. 2015). A pre-filing order is appealable. See id. § 11. 101(c). The notice of appeal for an accelerated appeal of the pre-filing order was due December 3, 2015. See Restrepo v. Alliance Riggers & Constructors, Ltd., No. 08-15-00011-CV, 2015 WL 999950, at *2 (Tex. App.—El Paso Mar. 4, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.); Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b).

On March 3, 2016, we received a notice of appeal. On March 16, 2016, we notified the appellant that the notice of appeal was filed outside the time for which an extension of time may be granted for the filing of a notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Jones did not file a response that shows that he filed a notice of appeal within fifteen days of its due date. See id. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

/s/_________

LEANNE JOHNSON

Justice Submitted on May 18, 2016
Opinion Delivered May 19, 2016 Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.


Summaries of

Jones v. Carter

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
May 19, 2016
NO. 09-16-00081-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2016)
Case details for

Jones v. Carter

Case Details

Full title:NATHANIEL JONES III, Appellant v. WARDEN CARTER, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Date published: May 19, 2016

Citations

NO. 09-16-00081-CV (Tex. App. May. 19, 2016)

Citing Cases

Nunu v. Risk

Although section 11.101(c) does not state whether it authorizes an interlocutory appeal or an appeal only…

Kennedy v. Jones

The Beaumont Court of Appeals has interpreted Section 11.101(c) as providing for an interlocutory appeal of…