George Houston v. Nuckols Crossing Partners, Ltd, also referred to as Woodway Village Apartments, by and through its Management agent, Blazer Real Estate Services, L.L.C. Appeal from County Court at Law No 1 of Travis County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-17-00233-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG GEORGE HOUSTON, Appellant, v. NUCKOLS CROSSING PARTNERS, LTD, A/K/A WOODWAY VILLAGE APARTMENTS, BY AND THROUGH ITS MANAGEMENT AGENT, BLAZER REAL ESTATE SERVICES, L.L.C., Appellees. On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Bee County, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Contreras and Hinojosa Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez Appellant, George Houston, attempted to perfect an appeal from an order issued by the trial court.1 Appellant is on the list of vexatious litigants compiled by the Office of the 1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Third Court of Appeals in Austin pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West, Westlaw through 2017 R.S.). Court Administration of the Texas Judicial System, and he has been prohibited from filing any more litigation in Texas courts without permission of a local administrative judge. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.104 (West, Westlaw through 2017 R.S.); see generally http://www.txcourts.gov/judicial-data/vexatious-litigants. The Clerk of this Court notified appellant that he is on the list of vexatious litigants and that he has been prohibited from filing any more litigation in Texas courts without permission of a local administrative judge. Appellant was advised that unless he has obtained the permission of the local administrative judge and provided a copy of such order permitting the filing of this appeal within ten days from the date of receipt of this notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant has failed to respond to this Court’s directive and the record before the Court fails to show that appellant obtained the permission of the local administrative judge to file this appeal. With limited exceptions not applicable to this case, "a clerk of a court may not file a litigation, original proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order under Section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the local administrative judge permitting the filing." Id. § 11.103(a) (West, Westlaw through 2017 R.S.). The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c). Any pending motions are dismissed as moot. /s/ Rogelio Valdez ROGELIO VALDEZ Chief Justice Delivered and filed the 14th day of December, 2017. 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.
