### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-16-00519- CV

Darr ell J. Harper, Appellant

v. State of Texas Com m ission on Jud icial Condu ct, A ppellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 200 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -GN-1 4-0 0227 5, H ONO RAB LE LO RA J. LI VINGSTO N, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant Dar

rell J

. Har

per, proc ee d i n g pro se, filed a notice of appea l in the trial court on August 3, 2016. Har per, howeve r, is on the State of Texas’ list of vexatious litigants. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 11.0 0 1 (g ener ally authorizing court to enter order prohibiting person from filing “a new litigatio n ” pro se without permission from local administrative judge when court, after notice and hearing , finds that person is “vexatious litigant”) , .004(b) (requiring Offic e of Court Administration (OCA) to “post on the ag ency ’s Interne t website a list of vexatious litigants subject to pref

iling order s”), .054 (listing criter ia for finding p l aintiff vexatious litigant); OCA L ist of Vexatious L itigants (Oc t. 10, 2016), available at http:// www.txcourts.gov/ media/1436145/vexatious-lit iga nts-10_10_16.pdf (last visited Oct. 11, 2016)

. The OCA l i s t reflects that Har per is subject to a pref

iling order that was filed in Travis County in J anuar

y 2015 specific ally prohibiting him “fr om filing new litigation in any courtin th i s State without permission from a local administrative judge in eac h new litigation.” See

htt p :/ /w w w . txc ourts.g ov/media/843678/Darr ell-Ha rper .pdf (last v is it e d O c t. 1 1 , 2 0 1 6 ) ; s e e a ls o T e x. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 11.102 (g ener ally prohibiting vexatious litigant from filing “new litigation” without permission from local administrative judge ), .103 (g ener ally prohibiting cler k of court from filing “litigation, orig inal proce eding , appea l, or other claim prese nted, p ro se, by

a vexatious litigant subject to a pref iling order under Section 11.101 unless t h e l i t iga nt obtains

an order from the appropr iate local administrative judge descr ibed by Section 1 1 .102(a) permitting the fili n g”) ; Dougl as v. Gove rnment Emp. Ins. Co. , No. 01-12-00129- CV, 2013 Tex. App. L EXI S 4590, at *1–3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 11, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.) (desc ribing chapte r 11 pref iling require ments for v ex at i o u s litigants); Johnson v. Hughey , No. 06-12-00079- CV, 2012 Tex. App. L EXI S 8406, at *3–5 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Oct. 5, 2012, no pet.) (me m. op.) (same ).

By order dated October 11, 2016, we notified Har per that he was require d to obtain the permissi on of t he local administrative j udg e to file t h i s appeal, provided him with the address of the local administrative judge , and order ed him within thirty day s of the date of the order t o demonstrate to this Court that he had obtained permission from the local administrative judge to file this appea l. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 11.001–.003. We also notified him that, i f h e failed to c omply

with the order

within 30 day s, we would dismiss this appea l. Ha rp er has failed to demonstrate that he has obtained the local administrativ e judge ’s permission to file this appea l. Acc ording ly , we dismiss this appea l. See Douglas , 2013 Tex. App. L EXI S 4590, at *5 (dismissing appeal because ve x atious liti g ant that was subjec t

2to prefiling order failed to c omply with c hapter 11’s require ment of obtaining local administrative

judge ’s permission to file appea l); Hughey , 2012 Tex. App. L EXI S 8406, at *5 (conc luding that prer equisite was not met and that lawsuit should not have been filed beca use vexatious litigant failed to demonstrate loca l administrative judge ’s per mission t o file lawsuit and dismissing a ppeal)

.

__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Bour land Dismissed Filed: Nove mber 15, 2016

3