Court Opinion

ID: 9366831
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-28 11:10:25.146302+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:55.404657
License: Public Domain

NO. 12-22-00314-CV

                              IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

                 TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

                                           TYLER, TEXAS

JAMES DUANE WASSON,                                      §        APPEAL FROM THE
APPELLANT

V.
                                                         §        COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2
KEVIN DALE WASSON, AS
INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR OF THE
ESTATE OF JAMES L. WASSON,
DECEASED,                                                §        GREGG COUNTY, TEXAS
APPELLEE

                                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                            PER CURIAM
        This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).
        James Duane Wasson, acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal on December 8, 2022. On
December 12, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the notice of appeal failed to
contain the information specifically required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and
Section 51.017(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5
(service); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.017(a) (West Supp. 2019) (notice of
appeal must be served on each court reporter responsible for preparing reporter’s record). The
notice warned that, unless Appellant filed a proper notice of appeal on or before January 11, the
appeal would be referred to the Court for dismissal. This deadline passed and Appellant has not
filed a compliant notice of appeal or otherwise responded to this Court’s notice.

         1
           Pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable
rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by
counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—
Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.).
         Because Appellant failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 9.5 and Section 51.017(a),
the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (on its own initiative after giving ten days’
notice to all parties, appellate court may dismiss appeal if appeal is subject to dismissal because
appellant failed to comply with a requirement of these rules, a court order, or a notice from the
clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time).
Opinion delivered January 25, 2023.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
                                   COURT OF APPEALS

      TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                           JUDGMENT

                                          JANUARY 25, 2023

                                         NO. 12-22-00314-CV

                            JAMES DUANE WASSON,
                                   Appellant
                                      V.
                KEVIN DALE WASSON, AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTOR
                 OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES L. WASSON, DECEASED,
                                    Appellee

                            Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2
                         of Gregg County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2022-0133-C)

                    THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the appellate record, and the same
being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that the appeal should be dismissed.
                    It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that
this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court
below for observance.
                    By per curiam opinion.
                    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.