Opinion
No. 05-15-01526-CV
04-04-2016
JOHNNY SPENCER, Appellant v. DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee
On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-15315
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Bridges and Evans
Opinion by Justice Evans
By an order dated January 27, 2016, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal because it did not appear that the trial court had signed any order in this case. We instructed appellant to file a letter brief addressing our concern.
We initially note that, on March 11, 2016, appellant filed a document entitled "Notice of Removal." A defendant can remove a case from a state court to federal district court by filing a document called a notice of removal "in the district court of the United States for the district and division within which such action is pending. . . ." 28 U.S.C.A. § 1446(a) (West Supp. 2015). After filing a notice of removal with the federal district court, the party "shall file a copy of the notice with the clerk of such State court, which shall effect the removal. . . ." Id. § 1446(d). Appellant failed to file with this Court a copy of a notice of removal bearing the file mark of the clerk of the federal district court. Accordingly, the record does not show that this case has been removed to federal court. See Crear v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n, No. 05-13-01683-CV, 2015 WL 137886, at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas March 13, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.).
In his notice of appeal, appellant stated he was appealing "from the failure of judgment (pre-filing order) by the Court on 12-14-15." Although not a model of clarity, it appears appellant may be appealing from a trial court's denial of permission to file a lawsuit after he had been declared a vexatious litigant. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(a) (West Supp. 2015). Such an order is not reviewable by ordinary appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(f) (West Supp. 2015).
On February 11, 2016, appellant filed "Objections and Response to Court's Second Order of Dismissal" which the Court construes as his letter brief addressing our jurisdictional concern. In his brief, appellant fails to identify any appealable order. Without an appealable order, this Court lacks jurisdiction. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
/David Evans/
DAVID EVANS
JUSTICE 151526F.P05
JUDGMENT
On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas.
Trial Court Cause No. DC-15-15315.
Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. Chief Justice Wright and Justice Bridges participating.
In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellee DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT recover its costs of this appeal from appellant JOHNNY SPENCER. Judgment entered this 4th day of April, 2016.