Timothy J Conley v. Dennis Clifford Gates Appeal from Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 9, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00482-CV TIMOTHY J. CONLEY, Appellant V. DENNIS CLIFFORD GATES, Appellee On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 4 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1093283 MEMORANDUM OPINION This appeal arises from a petition for eviction brought by appellee Dennis Clifford Gates against appellant Timothy J. Conley. Both Gates and Conley appeared pro se at trial. The trial court entered judgment in favor of Gates and Conley brought this appeal. In his first and second issues, Conley complains that Gates committed perjury when he testified. As a prerequisite to presenting a complaint for appellate review, the record must show: (1) the party presented a timely request, motion, or objection to the trial court sufficient to make trial court aware of complaint; and (2) the trial court ruled or refused to rule and the complaining party objected to the refusal. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a). The record does not show that Conley made the trial court aware of his complaints regarding Gates’ testimony. Accordingly, nothing is preserved for our review. Priddy v. Rawson, 282 S.W.3d 588, 597 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, pet. denied) (holding appellants waived complaint because did not expressly present it to the trial court). Issues one and two are overruled. Conley’s third issue claims the trial court exhibited an obvious bias against pro se litigants by more favorably treating lawyers. Conley failed to preserve error in the trial court regarding this contention. See Fox v. Alberto, 455 S.W.3d 659, 667 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. denied) (citing In re Estate of Gibbons, 451 S.W.3d 115, 122–23 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. denied). Issue three is overruled. Having overruled all of appellant’s issues, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. /s/ John Donovan Justices Panel consist of Justices Boyce, Donovan and Wise. 2

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.