in Re Barry Dwayne Minnfee

NUMBER 13-13-00099-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE BARRY DWAYNE MINNFEE On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1 Relator, Barry Dwayne Minnfee, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of mandamus on February 14, 2013. The petition for writ of mandamus is unclear regarding the specific actions or orders complained of in this original proceeding, the identity of the respondent or the real parties in interest, or the nature of the extraordinary relief sought by relator. 1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). Relator is on the list of vexatious litigants compiled by the Office of the Court Administration of the Texas Judicial System and has been prohibited from filing any more litigation in Texas courts without permission of a local administrative judge. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 11.101(a), 11.102(a), 11.104 (West Supp. 2011); see generally http://www.txcourts.gov/oca/vexatiouslitigants.asp. The petition for writ of mandamus filed in this cause fails to show that relator obtained the permission of the local administrative judge to file this original proceeding. With limited exceptions not applicable to this case, "a clerk of a court may not file a litigation, original proceeding, appeal, or other claim presented by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order under Section 11.101 unless the litigant obtains an order from the local administrative judge permitting the filing." Id. § 11.103(a) (West Supp. 2011). Accordingly, we DISMISS this original proceeding as improvidently filed. PER CURIAM Delivered and filed this 15th day of February, 2013. 2