In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-01-336 CV
____________________
HORACE JEFFERY, Appellant
V.
BURKHALTER AND HOWELL, Appellees
Polk County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 18826
Horace Jeffery, an inmate confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, sued persons identified only as "Burkhalter" and "Howell" for losing his personal property while he was in solitary confinement. Before service of process, the trial court dismissed Jeffery's petition for failure to comply with the requirements of Chapter 14.004 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
Jeffery does not challenge the trial court's ruling that the petition failed to comply with the procedural prerequisites imposed upon inmates pursuing litigation in forma pauperis. The trial court's judgment must be upheld on that unchallenged basis regardless of the issues raised in the appellant's brief. (1) Hall v. Treon, 39 S.W.3d 722, 724 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 2001, no pet.).
Furthermore, the trial court's ruling is supported by the record. An inmate who files a pro se suit as an indigent must file a separate affidavit identifying every pro se non-Family Code suit he has previously filed, and describe each suit by: 1) stating the operative facts for which relief was sought; 2) listing the case name, cause number, and the court in which the suit was brought; 3) identifying each party named in the suit; and 4) stating the result of the suit, including whether the suit was dismissed as frivolous or malicious under Section 13.001 or Section 14.003 or otherwise. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.004(a) (Vernon Supp. 2001). If the previous suit was dismissed as frivolous or malicious, then the affidavit must also include the date of the final order affirming the dismissal. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.004(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001). When an inmate does not comply with Section 14.004, the trial court is entitled to assume the suit is frivolous. Samuels v. Strain, 11 S.W.3d 404, 406-07 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.). Jeffrey's petition listed the style and docket number of five previously filed suits and the names Burkhalter and Howell do not appear in those case styles. However, none of the operative facts for any of the suits are stated in the petition, nor are the parties identified by name, nor are the results stated for any of the suits. Although the docket numbers, if accurate, suggest different claims, the information on Jeffery's previous filings is not provided in the form of an affidavit or inmate's unsworn declaration made under penalty of perjury. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 132.003 (Vernon Supp. 1997).
Because Jeffery did not comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 14.004(a), the trial court was within its discretion in finding Jeffery's suit to be frivolous. Hall v. Treon, 39 S.W.3d at 724; White v. State, 37 S.W.3d 562, 565 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 2001, no pet.). We find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in dismissing Jeffery's suit under Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Accordingly, the issues raised in Jeffery's brief are overruled. The judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on November 14, 2001
Opinion Delivered December 6, 2001
Do Not Publish
Before Walker, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.
1. On appeal, Jeffery relies on