Opinion issued August 12, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-19-00719-CV
———————————
ALI YAZDCHI, Appellant
V.
THE COHEN LAW FIRM, A/K/A GARY COHEN, Appellee
On Appeal from the 11th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 2016-82012
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Ali Yazdchi, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal the trial court’s final
judgment signed on June 21, 2019 denying all claims and dismissing all causes-of-
action asserted by Yazdchi. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The Office of Court Administration website lists all vexatious litigants subject
to prefiling orders. See Office of Court Administration, List of Vexatious Litigants
Subject to Prefiling Order, https://www.txcourts.gov/judicial-data/vexatious-
litigants/ (list last updated August 2, 2021); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE
§ 11.104(b) (requiring office of court administration to maintain list and post list of
vexatious litigants on agency’s website). Yazdchi is one such litigant. This list
contains three pre-filing orders concerning Yazdchi: (1) one signed on April 28,
2015 in Ali Yazdchi v. Mike Jones and Sam Adamo, Cause No. 2015-05013, in the
11th District Court of Harris County; (2) another signed on July 10, 2015, with an
amended order signed January 15, 2016, in Ali Yazdchi v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A.,
Cause No. 2015-11585 in the 215th District Court of Harris County; and (3) another
signed on July 15, 2015, in Ali Yazdchi v. BBVA Compass Bank, in Cause No. 2015-
05657, in the 151st District Court in Harris County. See Office of Court
Administration, List of Vexatious Litigants Subject to Pre-Filing Orders under
Section 11.101, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, available at:
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/950960/Ali-Yazdchi-Case-No-2015-
05013.pdf;
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1278447/Ali-Yazdchi-Case-No-2015-
11585-01_15_2016.pdf;
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1029372/Ali-Yazdchi-Case-No-2015-
05657.pdf
2
See also Douglas v. Am. Title Co., 196 S.W.3d 876, 878 n.2 (Tex. App.—Houston
[1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (taking judicial notice of Harris County record of vexatious
litigants).
The Clerk of this Court may not file an appeal presented by a vexatious litigant
subject to a prefiling order unless (1) the litigant first obtains an order from the local
administrative judge permitting the filing or (2) the appeal is from a prefiling order
designating the person a vexatious litigant. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE
§ 11.103(a), (d). Yazdchi’s appeal is not an appeal from the prefiling order
designating him a vexatious litigant. Thus, Yazdchi may not proceed with his appeal
unless the local administrative judge permitted this filing.
This Court issued a notice to Yazdchi’s advising him that we would dismiss
his appeal unless he responded within ten days with proof that, before filing the
appeal, he had obtained an order from the local administrative judge permitting the
appeal. Yazdchi did not adequately respond to the notice and the record is devoid of
any order permitting the filing of the appeal.1
1
Yazdchi filed a response falsely claiming that he received authorization from
the local administrative judge to file the appeal. Yazdchi attached a letter
signed by the local administrative judge in 2017 regarding an unrelated case
in which the administrative judge authorized an appeal because the underlying
lawsuit had been filed before the vexatious litigant orders were issued against
Yazdchi in 2015. Here, the lawsuit in the underlying case was filed in
November 2016—after Yazdchi was declared a vexatious litigant—and
Yazdchi has received no authorization to file this appeal.
3
Because Yazdchi has been declared a vexatious litigant and did not obtain an
order from the appropriate local administrative judge permitting the filing of his pro
se notice of appeal, we must dismiss the appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE
§ 11.103(a); Kastner v. Fulco, No. 01–13–00100–CV, 2013 WL 6157392, at *1–2
(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 21, 2013, no pet.) (dismissing appeal after
providing notice of intent to dismiss because vexatious litigant appellant failed to
provide copy of order permitting filing of appeal); McCray v. Prudential Ins., No.
14–12–00860–CV, 2012 WL 5586804, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Nov.
15, 2012, no pet.) (same).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a); 43.2(f). We
dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Countiss.
4