482 S.W.3d 246
Tex. App.
2015
Case Information

*1 Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

OPINION

No. 04-15-00647-CV

John E. RODARTE Sr.,

Appellant

v. BENEFICIAL TEXAS, INC. ,

Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2010-CI-14597 Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 9, 2015

DISMISSED

Appellant Jоhn E. Rodarte Sr., an indigent inmate acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal with this court, but he failed to file an accompanying affidavit relating to his previous suits. We ordered him to file a separate affidavit listing the previous pro se actions he has brought. . § 14.004 (West Supp. 2015). We notifiеd him that if he failed to comply with the statutory requirements, we could dismiss his appeal without further notiсe.

Because Appellant failed to comply with the statute and our order, we dismiss this appeal.

B ACKGROUND

On October 19, 2015, Appellant John E. Rodarte Sr., an inmate acting pro se, filed a noticе of appeal with this court. Appellant’s notice of appeal states he is currеntly incarcerated, shows his return address as the Clements Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justicе—Institutional Division, and states he is ‍​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‍indigent. Because Appellant is an inmate and asserts he cannоt pay costs, on October 23, 2015, we ordered Appellant to file in this court by November 12, 2015, (1) a separate affidavit listing the previous pro se actions he has brought and (2) a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement. See id. § 14.002(a) (applying affidavit and other requirements to inmate appeals effective January 1, 2012); § 14.004 (requiring a pro se inmate asserting inability to pay costs tо file a detailed list of previous pro se actions and a certified copy of the inmаte’s trust account statement). We advised Appellant that his affidavit and certified statement must bе timely filed and must meet the applicable statutory requirements. E.g. , § 14.004(a) (affidavit of actions); § 14.004(b) (dispositions); § 14.004(c) (account statement). We also cautioned Appellant that this court could dismiss this appeal if Appellant failed to timely file the statutorily required documents. Cf. Douglas v. Moffett 340 (Tex. App.—Houstоn [14th Dist.] 2013, no pet.) (dismissing an appeal where an inmate failed to comply with Chapter 14 requiremеnts); Amir-Sharif v. Mason , 243 S.W.3d 854, 857 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008, no pet.) (recognizing that a trial court may dismiss ‍​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‍an indigent inmate’s suit without notice or hearing for failing to file the previous actions affidavit). PPELLANT ’ S ESPONSE

On November 6, 2015, Appellant filed his “Appellant’s Brief.” In various portions of the body of his brief, he listed some of the cause numbers for actiоns he has initiated, but he did not provide the additional information required by statute. . § 14.004. He failed to provide the following information:

• “a separate affidavit,” id. § 14.004(a);

• “the operative facts for which relief was sought,” § 14.004(a)(2)(A); • “the case name [or] court in which the action was brought,” § 14.004(a)(2)(B); • “[the] identi[ty of] each party in the action,” § 14.004(а)(2)(C); and • “the result of the action, including whether the action or a claim that was a basis for the аction was dismissed as frivolous or malicious,” § 14.004(a)(2)(D).

Rather than provide the statutorily required informatiоn as ordered, Appellant asked this court to waive the statutory requirements and order the сlerk of this court to “obtain verification of the cases filed by [A]ppellant[] from the U.S. District Court, U.S. Cоurt of Appeals, [f]or [t]he [Fifth] Circuit in Louisiana, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, . . . , Bexar County District Clerk, Donna Kay McKinney, Trаvis County, Texas District Clerk, [and the] Third Court of Appeals in Austin, Texas.”

D ISPOSITION OF A PPEAL

Our October 23, 2015 order identified the informatiоn Appellant was required to provide and cautioned him that this appeal could be dismissеd if he failed to meet the statutory ‍​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‍requirements. In his response, Appellant listed at least twelve cause numbers, but failed to provide the additional information the statute expressly requires. See id. § 14.004; Amir-Sharif , 243 S.W.3d at 857. Instеad, citing Rule 2, Appellant asked this court to waive the statutory requirements and order the clеrk of this court to obtain the information that we instructed Appellant he must provide. R. PP P. 2 (Suspension of Rules).

“The requirement to file the аffidavit relating to previous filings is mandatory, and failure to file the affidavit is grounds alone to dismiss the suit.” , 243 S.W.3d at 858 (citing T . § 14.003); see White v. Univ. of Tex. Med. Branch , No. 04- 02-00778-CV, 2003 WL 21010675, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 7, 2003, no pet.) (mem. *4 op.). Appellant was required to file a separate affidavit containing all the information required by the statute. See Amir-Sharif , 243 S.W.3d at 858. Even after he was warned, he knowingly failed to provide the ‍​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‍information required by stаtute and ordered by this court. See T C IV . P RAC . & EM C ODE NN . § 14.004; Douglas , 243 S.W.3d at 857. We decline Appellant’s invitation to expend judicial resourсes to satisfy a burden the legislature placed on him. See . § 14.004; Kennedy v. Staples 751 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2011, no pet.) (addrеssing litigants’ access to valuable judicial resources). Further, because Appellant failed to provide a complete affidavit of previous filings, we conclude the underlying cause is frivolous. , 418 S.W.3d at 340 (“When an inmate does not provide a complete affidavit of previous filings, ‘the trial court is entitled to assume the [current action] is substantially similar to one previously filed by the inmatе, and therefore, frivolous.’” (alteration in original) (quoting Bell v. Tex. Dep’t of Criminal ‍​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‍ Justice-Institutional Div. , 962 S.W.2d 156, 158 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, pet. denied)).

Apрellant’s motion to waive the statutory requirements for an affidavit relating to previous filings is denied, and this appeal is dismissed.

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Read the detailed case summary