Michael A. Kennedy v. Anderson County, Texas Appeal from 369th District Court of Anderson County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-20-00226-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS MICHAEL A. KENNEDY, APPELLANT § APPEAL FROM THE 369TH V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS, APPELLEE § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Appellant, Michael A. Kennedy, filed a notice of appeal from a judgment signed on September 11, 2020. On September 24, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the notice of appeal failed to contain the information specifically required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and Section 51.017(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See TEX. R. APP. P 9.5 (service); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.017(a) (West Supp. 2019) (notice of appeal must be served on each court reporter responsible for preparing reporter’s record). The notice warned that, unless Appellant filed a proper notice of appeal on or before October 26, the appeal would be referred to the Court for dismissal. This deadline passed and Appellant has not filed a compliant notice of appeal or otherwise responded to this Court’s September 24 notice. 1 Because Appellant failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 9.5 and Section 51.017(a), the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (on its own initiative after giving ten days’ Kennedy is acting pro se; however, pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.). 1 notice to all parties, appellate court may dismiss appeal if appeal is subject to dismissal because appellant failed to comply with a requirement of these rules, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time). Opinion delivered November 10, 2020. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT NOVEMBER 10, 2020 NO. 12-20-00226-CV MICHAEL A. KENNEDY, Appellant V. ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 369th District Court of Anderson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. DCCV18-592-369) THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
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.
