Court Opinion

ID: 9959982
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-13 09:14:56.422359+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:02.903125
License: Public Domain

NO. 12-24-00037-CV

                             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

                TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

                                         TYLER, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST                                       §       APPEAL FROM THE 321ST

OF R. H., A CHILD                                     §       JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

                                                      §       SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

                                     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).
        K.H., acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal on March 6, 2024. On March 7, 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 March 18, the appeal would be referred to
the Court for dismissal. This deadline passed and Appellant has not filed a compliant notice of
appeal or other response to this Court’s notice.
        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’

         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.).
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 April 10, 2024.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

                                                          2
                                  COURT OF APPEALS

      TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                           JUDGMENT

                                            APRIL 10, 2024

                                         NO. 12-24-00037-CV

                            IN THE INTEREST OF R. H., A CHILD

                                Appeal from the 321st District Court
                          of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 23-0541-D)

                    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