Christopher M. Deiotte v. R.L. Ott, David Bone, Howell, F. Helm, Read, Klena, Martha Edwards, Seagroves and Angela Johnson--Appeal from 1A District Court of Tyler County

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-03-252 CV
____________________
CHRISTOPHER M. DEIOTTE, Appellant
V.
R. L. OTT, DAVID BONE, HOWELL, F. HELM,
READ, KLENA, MARTHA EDWARDS, SEAGROVES,
AND ANGELA JOHNSON, Appellees
On Appeal from the 1-A District Court
Tyler County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 18,533
MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from the dismissal of appellant, Christopher M. Deiotte's lawsuit pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. (1) Deiotte, a prison inmate, sued eight employees of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice -- Institutional Division for alleged violations of 42 U.S.C. 1983 (Supp. 2003), and 42 U.S.C. 1986 (Supp. 2003). Appellees (2) filed a motion to dismiss which was predicated on the alleged failure of Deiotte's pleadings to comply with certain procedural requirements of Chapter 14. The trial court subsequently dismissed Deiotte's suit on those grounds. An examination of the record before us indicates the trial court properly dismissed appellant's suit for failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter 14.

The "brief" filed by Deiotte in his pro-se appeal fails to meet minimum briefing requirements under Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. Deiotte fails to raise any appellate issues, makes no argument, and cites no supporting authorities. Deiotte's appellate brief appears to be merely a type-written copy of what is contained in his handwritten "petition" in the trial court. (3) As Deiotte has not brought forth any appellate issues for review or raised error on the part of the trial court, we are presented with nothing to review. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM

 

Submitted on October 29, 2003

Opinion Delivered October 30, 2003

 

Before McKeithen, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.

1. The references in this opinion to Chapter 14 are to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 14.001-14.014 (Vernon 2002).

2. Only defendants Johnson, Bone, Helm, and Edwards filed an answer and motion to dismiss. Nevertheless, the code provisions provide for a trial court to dismiss an inmate's claims "either before or after service of process" if the trial court finds the claims are frivolous. See 14.003(a)(2). The trial court's order dismissing the lawsuit found Deiotte's petition was not in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 14. This finding is within the factors a trial court may consider when determining if an inmate's petition is frivolous or malicious. See 14.003(b).

3. Deiotte entitles his "petition," "Application for writ of HABEAS CORPUS: AD TESTIFICANDUM."