|
|
|
|
Opinion filed August 20, 2009
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
____________
No. 11-09-00119-CV
__________
JAMES WILLIAM HORNSBY, Appellant
V.
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ET AL, Appellees
On Appeal from the 259th District Court
Jones County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 021871
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
James William Hornsby sued the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Executive Director Brad Livingston, Correctional Officer Frances Odom, and Lieutenant Santos J. Garcia, Jr. for over $9,000 in damages resulting from the alleged seizure of his personal items. The trial court dismissed Hornsby=s action for failure to comply with Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. '' 14.001-.014 (Vernon 2002). We affirm.
On appeal, Hornsby briefs three issues. In his first issue, Hornsby argues that the trial court abused its discretion because his claims are not frivolous. Next, he argues that the district clerk violated his rights to access the courts. Finally, Hornsby contends that his claim is Aalmost entirely identical@ to the case of Minix v. Gonzales, 162 S.W.3d 635 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.).
Hornsby does not address the trial court=s determination that he failed to comply with the mandatory elements in Chapter 14. The record does not support Hornsby=s claims concerning the actions of the clerk of the trial court. We find the Minix case to be distinguishable. In Minix, both the trial court and the appellate court addressed the merits of the claims advanced. In the present case, the trial court was unable to consider the merits of Hornsby=s claims. All of Hornsby=s contentions have been considered. Each is overruled.
The order of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
August 20, 2009
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.