Court Opinion

ID: 9382303
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-26 07:16:29.784771+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:38.481336
License: Public Domain

Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed
March 21, 2023.

                                               In The

                          Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                                        NO. 14-22-00655-CV

                         IN RE MICHAEL A. POWELL, Relator

                               ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
                                WRIT OF MANDAMUS
                                  455th District Court
                                 Travis County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. D-1-GN-21-001728

                               MEMORANDUM OPINION

        On September 9, 2022, relator Michael A. Powell, acting pro se, filed a
petition for writ of mandamus in this Court.1 See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221;
see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator has been declared a vexatious litigant and is

        1
          Relator initially filed this mandamus in the Third Court of Appeals. Pursuant to section 73.001
of the Texas Government Code, the Texas Supreme Court transferred this proceeding to this Court on
September 9, 2022. Powell’s direct appeal, Michael A. Powell v. Jenny Hodgkins, Executive Director,
State Bar of Texas; 14-22-00300-CV, also was transferred to this Court on April 27, 2022 by the Texas
Supreme Court, and was affirmed by this Court on March 9, 2023.
therefore subject to the pre-filing order under section 11.101 of the Texas Civil
Practice and Remedies Code. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§ 11.101,
11.103.

      Under section 11.103(a), the clerk of this court may not file an original
proceeding or other matter presented by a vexatious litigant subject to a pre-filing
order under section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the local
administrative judge permitting the filing or the petition is from a pre-filing order
entered under section 11.101 designating the person a vexatious litigant.         Id.
§ 11.103(a) & (d). The petition does not assert and no appendix or mandamus
record has been provided to demonstrate that this is a mandamus from a pre-filing
order entered under section 11.101.

      Relator has not shown that he has obtained an order from the local
administrative judge permitting the filing of this original proceeding.

      Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus for lack of
jurisdiction. See id. § 11.1035(b); In re Johnson, No. 14-22-00332-CV, 2022 WL
3093195, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 4, 2022, orig. proceeding)
(mem. op.) (dismissing vexatious litigant’s petition for writ of mandamus in
absence of order from local administrative judge permitting filing of original
proceeding).

                                       PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Hassan.

                                          2