In Re: Arturo Solis Appeal from 52nd District Court of Coryell County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed and Opinion Filed December 7, 2017 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01234-CV IN RE ARTURO SOLIS, Relator Original Proceeding from the 52nd District Court Coryell County, Texas1 Trial Court Cause No. C10-11-40751 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Brown, and Stoddart Opinion by Justice Stoddart Before the Court is relator’s “Motion for Immediate T.R.O. and Injunction Commanding Allred Unit Warden to Furnish Adequate Legal Use Writing Materials and Postage and to Refrain from Confiscating Legal Materials and for Extension of Time,” which is dated October 5, 2017 (“the Motion”). Relator was declared a vexatious litigant on June 27, 2013 and is subject to a pre-filing order prohibiting relator from filing “any new litigation in a court of this State without first obtaining permission from a local administrative judge pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 11.102.” See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(a)(1), 11.103(a) (West Supp. 2016). 1 Pursuant to Tex. Gov’t Code § 73.001, the Supreme Court of Texas transferred all currently pending and future motions, writs of mandamus, and new proceedings arising from trial court cause number C10-11-40751 from the Court of Appeals for the Tenth District, Waco, Texas, to this Court. See TEX. SUP. CT. ORDER, Misc. Docket No. 17–9134 (Oct. 24, 2017). Relator filed the Motion under cause number 05-17-01143-CV, which was the cause number assigned to relator’s petition for writ of mandamus seeking review of an August 9, 2017 order denying relator’s motion for permission to file a petition for equitable bill of review. Reeves v. State, No. 05-12-01142-CV, 2013 WL 1249713, *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 13, 2013, no pet.) (a vexatious litigant who is denied permission to file a litigation may apply for a writ of mandamus within thirty days of the decision); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(f) (West Supp. 2016). After reviewing the Motion, the Court determined that the relief sought in the Motion was different from the relief sought in cause number 05-17-01143-CV. Specifically, the Motion seeks an order requiring the warden at the prison unit where relator is housed to take certain actions, whereas the petition in 05-17-01143-CV sought review of the August 9, 2017 order denying relator permission to file a petition for equitable bill of review. The Court accordingly docketed the Motion under a new cause number. By letter dated October 26, 2017, the Court notified relator that the Court reviewed the motion, determined that it constitutes a new litigation, and docketed the motion as cause number 05-17-01234-CV. The Court instructed relator to file, by November 6, 2017, an order signed by the local administrative judge giving relator permission to file this original proceeding. The Court informed relator that failure to provide the requested documentation by November 6, 2017 would result in dismissal of the proceeding without further notice. To date, relator has not provided this Court with a written order from the local administrative judge giving relator permission to file the Motion. Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(a) (West Supp. 2016) (a person –2– who has been declared a vexatious litigant must seek permission to file a new litigation). 171234F.P05 /Craig Stoddart/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE –3–
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
