### 1



### Order filed September 24 , 2020

.

In t he



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ 

### NO. 14

- 19

- 00506

- CV

____________ 

### MICHAEL REEVES , Appellant

v . CENTRAL HOUSTON NISSAN , Appellee

On Appeal from the 113th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Cour t C ause No. 2018

- 55206



### ORDER STAYING APPEAL

On September 21, 2020 , appellee Cent ral Houston Nissan filed with the court a notice that before filing this lit igation, pro se appellant Michael Reeves was found to be a vexa tious litigant prohibit ed fr om f iling , pro se, new litigation in
Texas courts without seeking the permission of the local administrative judge of

### 2



### the court in whi ch he intended to f ile the litigation

. 1 

### See Tex. Civ. P rac. & R e m. Code Ann. § § 11. 101(a), ( e), .102 (a)(1) , .10 3 5

. There is no indi c a tion in the record before us that Ree ves o btained the r equired perm ission to file this litigation , so it appears that this litigation was mistakenly filed by the trial court clerk

. 2

1 A district court determined R e e v es was a ve xatious litigant s ubject to Civil Practice and Remedies Code chap ter 11 and ordered that he “ i s hereby prohibited fr om fili ng, in propia persona , a ny new litigation in a court in the State of Texas without first obtaining approval to do so from the loc al administrative judge o f the court in which [he] seeks to file the litigation. ” See Reeves v. Tex. Dep ’ t of Ins., Div. of Wor ker ’ s C omp. , N o. DC

- 06

- 0 7706

- G (134th Dist

. C t. , Dallas County, Tex. N ov. 8 , 2006) , a ff ’ d , No. 0 5

- 07

- 00020

- CV, 2007 WL 3293629, at *1 (Tex. App

. — Dallas Nov. 8, 2007, no pet.)

. H e filed the underlying case in this appeal o n August 16 , 2018.

2 Civil P r acti ce and Remedi es Co de secti o n 11.103 ( a ) states , “ 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 appro p riate local administrative judge described by Section 11.102 (a) permitting th e filing. ” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11.103(a) (emp hasis added) . The Code Construction Act states , “ ‘ May not ’ imposes a prohibition and i s synonymous with ‘ sh all not. ’ ” Tex. Gov ’ t Code Ann. § 311.016( 5). Civil P r acti ce and Remedi es Co de section 11.103 5 ( a ) states , “ I f the clerk mistakenly files litigation presented, pro se, by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order under Section 1 1.101 without an orde r from the appropriate local administrative judge described by Section 1 1.102 (a), a ny party may file with the clerk and serve on the plaintiff and the other parties to the litigation a notice stating that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant required to obtain per m ission under Section 11.102 to file litigation. ” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11.103 5 (a) (emp hasis added) . The Code Construction Act states , “ ‘ May ’ creates discretionary authority or grants permission or a power. ” Tex. Gov ’ t Code Ann. § 31 1.016( 1 ).

W hile it would have been preferable for appellee to have filed a noti c e with the clerk at trial stating that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant subject to a prefi l ing order , chapter 11 neith er set s a time limit for filing such notice, nor plac e s a requi r ement on other parties ; instead, cha pter 11 p rohibits the clerk from filing a litigation, original proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented, pro se, by a vexatious litigant su bject to a prefiling order

. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11. 103 (a)

. Ac c ordingly, the re is no complaint that should have been made to the trial court that requires prese r vation as a prerequisite for presenting a complaint for appellate review. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)

.

### 3



### As require d by Civil P r acti ce and Remedi e s Co de section 11.1035(b) , we

o r der th is appeal stayed

. See i d. § 11.1035 (b). We will dismiss the li tigation , 3 

### i.e. , dismiss this appeal, vacate the trial court ’ s jud gment, and dismiss the case in the trial court , unless no later than October 1, 20 20, Reeves ob tain s an o r der from the loc al adminis trative judge for the 113 th Judicial District Co urt of H arris County , wh ere this litigation was filed, permitting filing of the l i tigation. 4 

### See id

. ( court to dismiss litigation if vexati ous litiga nt does not o btain order “ pe rmit ting t h e filing

o f the liti gation ” “ not later than the 10th day after the date the notice is fi l ed ” ); see also id. § 11.102 ( a)(1) ( vexatiou s litigant must seek per mission from “ the local administrative judge of the type of court in which the vexatious liti gant in tends to f ile ” ).

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Spain, Hassan, and Poissant.

3 “ ‘ Litigation ’ m eans a civil action commenc ed, maint a ined, or pending i n any state or f ederal court

. ” Tex. C i v. Pr a c. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11.01 (2).

4 A n involuntary dismissal of litigation un d er Civil P r acti ce and Remedi es Co de section 11.1035(b) differs from an involuntar y dism issal of the appeal u nder Texa s Rule of Appellate Pro c e d ure 42.3 , as section 11.1035(b) requires dismissal of the litigation.