R. Wayne Johnson v. Robert Ramirez ( 2024 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-24-00006-CV
R. WAYNE JOHNSON, Appellant
V.
ROBERT RAMIREZ, ET AL., Appellees
On Appeal from the 62nd District Court
Lamar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 92217
Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
MEMORANDUM OPINION
R. Wayne Johnson, proceeding pro se, has filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s
order dismissing his case with prejudice for failure to comply with his obligations under Section
11.101 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN.
§ 11.101. Upon this Court’s review of Johnson’s filing, we noted a potential defect in our
jurisdiction over this appeal.
Section 11.102(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides, “A vexatious
litigant subject to a prefiling order under Section 11.101 is prohibited from filing, pro se, new
litigation in a court to which the order applies without seeking the permission of . . . the local
administrative judge.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 11.102(a).1 Although the clerk of
this Court may file an appeal from a prefiling order, the clerk “may not file a litigation, original
proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented, pro se, by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling
order under Section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the appropriate local
administrative judge described by Section 11.102(a) permitting the filing.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. &
REM. CODE ANN. § 11.103.
The record in this matter is devoid of an order from the appropriate local administrative
judge permitting the filing of this appeal. By letter dated February 23, 2024, we notified Johnson
of this potential defect in our jurisdiction and afforded him the opportunity to show this Court
how it had jurisdiction over this proceeding. We further informed Johnson that he was required
1
We have previously dealt with Johnson in his capacity as a vexatious litigant. See, e.g., In re Johnson, No. 06-11-
00116-CV, 2011 WL 5135298 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Oct. 28, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); In re Johnson,
No. 06-11-00096-CV, 2011 WL 4686502 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Oct. 7, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).
2
to respond by March 14, 2024, and that his failure to do so would result in dismissal of his case
for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Johnson did not file a response. We,
therefore, conclude that his case is ripe for dismissal.
We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Charles van Cleef
Justice
Date Submitted: March 22, 2024
Date Decided: March 25, 2024
3