IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-09-00245-CV
MARSA HALL,
Appellant
v.
CHARLES C. BELL, TONY R. O'HARE,
KEVIN MAYFIELD AND JOHN DOE,
Appellees
From the 278th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 24,621
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Marsa Hall, a prisoner, appeals the dismissal of his lawsuit against several
employees of the Texas prison system. The trial court dismissed his lawsuit as being
frivolous. We affirm.
Hall filed a brief in this appeal in September. Soon thereafter, he filed a motion
to strike his brief and a motion to stay the appeal. In October, Hall filed another motion
to strike his brief. From those pleadings, it appeared Hall conceded that there were
Chapter 14 requirements with which he failed to comply. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.
CODE ANN. §§ 14.004 (Affidavit Relating to Previous Filings) and 14.005 (Grievance
System Decision/Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies) (Vernon 2002). The trial
court does not abuse its discretion in dismissing a suit under either section. See
Draughon v. Cockrell, 112 S.W.3d 775, 776 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2003, no pet.); Hickson
v. Moya, 926 S.W.2d 397, 399 (Tex. App.--Waco 1996, no pet.). Further, under such
circumstances, the trial court does not err in dismissing the proceeding as long as the
dismissal is without prejudice. See Hickman v. Adams, 35 S.W.3d 120, 124 (Tex. App.—
Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, no pet.). The trial court’s dismissal in this proceeding was
without prejudice.
In an order issued on October 7, 2009, we notified Hall that we saw no reason not
to affirm the trial court’s dismissal since Hall conceded the failure to fully comply with
Chapter 14 and since the dismissal was without prejudice. We further warned Hall that
unless Hall, or any party desiring to continue this appeal, showed a reason why these
motions should not be denied and this appeal affirmed, within 21 days from the date of
the order, the Court would render an opinion and judgment to that effect.
Hall responded to our order and again conceded that he failed to file an affidavit
relating to previous filings and failed to file an affidavit regarding the exhaustion of his
administrative remedies. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 14.004 (Affidavit
Relating to Previous Filings) and 14.005 (Grievance System Decision/Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies) (Vernon 2002). He again asks that we grant his motions to
strike his brief and his motion to stay the appeal. However, because Hall concedes in
his motions and in his response that he has not complied with the procedural
Hall v. Bell Page 2
requirements of Chapter 14, we find that the trial court did not err in dismissing his
suit. Accordingly, his motions to strike and motion to stay are denied and the trial
court’s judgment is affirmed.
TOM GRAY
Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Reyna, and
Justice Davis
Motions denied
Affirmed
Opinion delivered and filed November 10, 2009
[CV06]
Hall v. Bell Page 3