law-pro-se-suits

TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASES: PRISONERS, PRO SE LITIGANTS

Higgings v. Randall County Sheriff's Office (Higgins II), No. 06-0917 (Tex. May 16, 2008)
(Opinion by Harriet O'Neill) (
prisoner suit, defective affidavit of indigence, right to appeal)
LAWRENCE HIGGINS v. RANDALL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE; from Randall County; 7th district
(07-05-00004-CV, ___ S.W.3d ___, 08-22-06)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral
argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that court.
Justice O'Neill delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice Hecht, Justice Brister, and
Justice Medina joined.
Justice Green delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Wainwright and Justice Willett joined.
(Justice Johnson not sitting)

Houser v. McElveen
, No. 06-0504 (Tex. Jan. 11, 2008)(per curiam)
(appellate procedure, timeliness of notice of appeal,
suit by prisoner)
BRUCE WAYNE HOUSER v. KENNETH W. MCELVEEN, ET AL.; from Jackson County; 13th district
(13-05-00426-CV, ___ S.W.3d ___, 02/09/06)   
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral
argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that court.

TEXAS COURTS OF APPEALS CASES: PRO-SE LITIGANTS, PRISONERS, IFP SUITS

08-0410  
JESUS MENDOZA v. PEDRO S. MONTANO M.D., AND JUSTICE OF THE PEACE ISMAEL "MELO" OCHOA; from
Hidalgo County; 13th district (
13-07-00146-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 02-28-08, pet. denied Aug 1, 2008)(pro se appeal)
This is an appeal from an order of dismissal that purports to be agreed to by all parties. Appellant, Jesus Mendoza,
appearing pro se, urges that the trial court's denial of his motion to reconsider the agreed order deprived him of due
process and discriminated against him because of his disability. No appellees' brief has been filed to assist us in the
resolution of this case. We affirm. ...  Without evidence or any documentation showing that the trial court erred in
some way, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in either not continuing the hearing on February
5th or by denying his request for reconsideration. The agreed order of dismissal is affirmed.

08-0173  
WALTER MITCHELL v. CARLA BERRY, NORRIS BOOTH, BRAD NATHAN WALKER, JOHN DOE, MARIA ALICIA
GARCIA, URBAN REHABILITATION STANDARDS BOARD CITY OF DALLAS TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS,
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; from Dallas County; 5th district
(05-06-01328-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-20-07, pet. denied) as redrafted, as amended
(pro se suit, affidavit of inability to pay costs)

07-1038  
ALINDA FRANCINE CARTER-THOMAS v. RICKY LYNN SULLIVAN; from Collin County; 5th district
(
05-06-00990-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 11-06-07, pet. denied Jun 2008) as redrafted (PI-auto accident negligence, pro
se suits, deemed admissions)
Alinda Francine Carter-Thomas appeals a take-nothing summary judgment entered in this personal injury case.
Carter-Thomas, appearing pro se in this Court as she did below, argues generally that she is entitled to a trial on
the merits of her negligence claims against appellee Ricky Lynn Sullivan. For the reasons explained below, we affirm
the trial court's judgment.
Carter-Thomas alleges she suffered disabling injuries in a motor vehicle accident that was proximately caused by
Sullivan's negligence. Sullivan moved for summary judgment arguing (1) deemed admissions established that
Carter-Thomas's own negligence was the cause of the accident and her injuries, if any, and (2) Carter-Thomas
could offer no evidence of damages. Carter-Thomas filed a response to the motion, but the response contained no
sworn testimony or evidence in admissible form. The trial judge heard the motion and granted it; he subsequently
heard and denied a motion for reconsideration. Carter-Thomas appeals.