In Re Robert Norman Smithback Appeal from 411th District Court of Polk County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-16-00029-CV _________________ IN RE ROBERT NORMAN SMITHBACK ________________________________________________________________________ Original Proceeding 411th District Court of Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. CIV29146 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Robert Norman Smithback filed a mandamus petition seeking to compel the 411th District Court to rule on motions filed in his civil case, including Smithback’s motion to compel non-party discovery from a federal district court, a request for a bench warrant to unscheduled hearings, and a motion for a temporary restraining order authorizing Smithback to communicate without using the prison communication system. We notified Smithback that he must pay the filing fee or file a declaration of inability to pay costs with an inmate account statement and an affidavit of previous filings. 1 Smithback submitted a declaration of inability to pay with an inmate account statement and an affidavit of previous filings with his amended petition, but his list of previous filings identifies only one case. Smithback neither identifies each pro se action previously brought by him, nor describes each action that was previously brought by: stating the operative facts for which relief was sought; listing the case name, cause number, and the court in which the action was brought; identifying each party named in the action; stating the result of the action, including whether the action or a claim that was a basis for the action was dismissed as frivolous; and stating the date of the final order affirming the dismissal. 1 See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.004 (West Supp. 2015). Smithback’s failure to comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 14.004 is grounds for dismissal. See In re Price, No. 07-15-00137-CV, 2015 WL 1883924, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Apr. 23, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); In re Kennedy, No. 12-15-00026-CV, 2015 WL 455752, at **1-2 (Tex. App.— 1 Smithback failed to disclose his extensive litigation history. See, e.g., Smithback v. Texas, No. 3:07-CV-0288-M ECF, 2007 WL 1518971 at, *1 (N.D. Tex. 2007); Smithback v. Doe, No. Civ.A.3:04-CV-146-L, 2004 WL 1944057, at *1 (N.D. Tex. 2004) (action dismissed as frivolous); Smithback v. 265th Judicial Dist. Court, No. 3:01-CV-1658-M, 2002 WL 1268031, at *5 (N.D. Tex. 2002) (action dismissed as frivolous); Smithback v. Dallas C’nty Judicial Dist., No. 3:02CV-1081-G, 2002 WL 1878354, at *5 (N.D. Tex. 2002) (action dismissed as frivolous). 2 Tyler Jan 30, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. PETITION DISMISSED. PER CURIAM Submitted on March 23, 2016 Opinion Delivered March 24, 2016 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ. 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.
