James De Moss v. Charles Cothron

Opinion filed September 10, 2009

 

 

Opinion filed September 10, 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                        In The

                                                                             

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                  ___________

 

                                                          No. 11-09-00074-CV

                                           __________

 

                                        JAMES DE MOSS, Appellant

 

                                                             V.

 

                               CHARLES COTHRON ET AL, Appellees

 

 

                                         On Appeal from the 259th District Court

 

                                                           Jones County, Texas

 

                                                    Trial Court Cause No. 20752

 

 

                                              M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

In April 2005, James De Moss sued Correctional Officer Charles Cothron, Captain Ronnie Williams, Property Officer Janay Williams, Sergeant Denis Hawkins, Correctional Officer Patrick Martin, Correctional Officer Donald Davis, Assistant Warden Stacey Jackson, Assistant Warden Cary Cook, and Mailroom Supervisor Amanda McCree for various negligence, abuse, tort, retaliation, and  civil rights claims.  On February 23, 2009, appellees filed a motion for dismissal for want of prosecution pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a.  The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the case.  We affirm.


Appellant has filed various motions, responses, documents, and a brief in which he challenges the dismissal of his claims.  He argues that the trial court violated his freedom of speech.  He also contends that a motion to recuse was pending before the trial court and, therefore, that the delay of four years was due to the trial court=s inaction not to his actions.  The record before this court does not support any of appellant=s contentions.

All of appellant=s arguments have been considered.  Each is overruled.  The order of the trial court is affirmed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

September 10, 2009

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.