## NO. 12

- 23

- 00323

- CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

IN RE: EDWIN E. BUCKNER, JR
. , RELATOR § § § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Edwin E. Buckner, Jr., acting pro se, filed this original p roceeding to complain of Respondent Gregg County Clerk Michelle Gilley ’ s failure to file his answer in a probate case. 1 This Court’s mandamus authority is limited to (1) a judge of a district, statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court in the court of app eals district; (2) a judge of a district court who is acting as a magistrate at a court of inquiry under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Chapter 52 in the court of appeals district; (3) an associate judge of a district or county court
appo inted by a judge under Chapter 201, Family Code, in the court of appeals district for the judge who appointed the associ ate judge; or (4) a situation in which a writ of mandamus is necessary to protect the Court’s jurisdiction. T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221(a) , ( b) (West 2005). The County Clerk is not a judge over which this Court possesses mandamus authority. In re Emerson , Nos. 12

- 20

- 00068

- C R & 12

- 20

- 00069

- CR, 2020 WL 1536510, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Tyler Mar. 31, 2020, orig. proceeding) ( mem. op.) (citing T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221(a) , (b) ) ; see In re Dotson , No. 12

- 20

- 00205

- CV, 2020 WL 5552626 (Tex. App.

— Tyler Sept. 1 6, 2020, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (dismissing mandamus proceeding

a gainst district clerk for want of jurisdiction )

. Nor does the record demonstrate tha t issuance of a

1 Judith Janet Thomas i s the Real Party in Interest.2 writ of mandamus against the Co unty Clerk is necessary to protect thi s C ourt ’ s jurisdiction. See generally In re Vargas , No. 01

- 12

- 00351

- CV, 2012 WL 1454550, at *1 (Tex. Ap p.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 26, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op) (per curiam) (dismissing mandamus proceeding against dis trict clerk for want of jurisdiction because addressing compla int that clerk refused to file petition was not necessary to enforce ap pellate court jurisdiction ). For this reason,

we deny Relator ’ s petition for writ of mandamus. 2
Opinion delivered Janua ry 10, 2024. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

2 Additionally, Relator ’ s petition fails to comply with appellate Rules 52 .2, 52.3(a)

- (h), and (j)

- (k) , and 52.7

. See T EX

. R

. A PP

. P

. 52.2 ( designation of par tie s ) ; T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.3 (form and contents of petition); T E X

. R. A PP

. P. 52.7 (record)

. The Clerk of this Court notified Relator of the defects and gave a de adl ine by which to correct them. Appellant did n ot correct the defects.

## COURT OF APPEALS
TWELF TH C OURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT

J ANUARY 10, 2024
NO. 12-23-00323- CV

E DWIN E. BUCKNER, JR. , Relator V.
M IC HELLE GILLEY , Respondent

O RIGINAL P ROCEEDING O N THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of mandamus filed by Edwin E. Buckn er, Jr. ; who is the relator in appellate cause number 12 -23-00323- CV , arising out of trial court cause number 2023-0097-E, pending on the docket of the County Court at Law No 2 of Gregg County , Texas. Said petition for writ of mandamus having been filed h erein on December 20, 2023 , and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that the w ri t should not issue , it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of mandamus be, and the same is, hereby denied

. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.