In Re Carolyn Barnes v. the State of Texas

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00193-CV
__________________

IN RE CAROLYN BARNES

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding
Probate Court No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 20-39251-P
__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On April 15, 2025, the local administrative judge for the Statutory Probate

Courts of Montgomery County, Texas, signed an order denying Carolyn Barnes’s

request to file new litigation in Trial Cause Number 20-39251-P, In the Estate of

Darrell John Bednorz, Deceased. Barnes is a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling

order that prohibits her from proceeding pro se without obtaining permission from

the appropriate local administrative judge. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §

11.101(a). On May 19, 2025, Barnes filed a petition for a writ of mandamus that

challenges the trial court’s order denying Barnes’s permission to file an intervention

1
in Trial Cause Number 20-39251-P.1 See id. § 11.102(f); see also In re Cooper, No.

05-21-00549-CV, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 6595, at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 10,

2021, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); In re Retzlaff, No. 09-18-00093-CV, 2018 Tex.

App. LEXIS 1836, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Mar. 13, 2018, orig. proceeding)

(mem. op.) (applying section 11.102 to an intervention filed by a vexatious litigant).

A vexatious litigant may apply for a writ of mandamus with the court of

appeals no later than the 30th day after the date of the decision. Tex. Civ. Prac. &

Rem. Code Ann. § 11.102(f). The 30-day limit is jurisdictional. See In re Carroll,

No. 05-25-00436-CV, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 2564, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Apr.

15, 2025, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).

Barnes filed her mandamus petition more than 30 days after the local

administrative judge denied leave for her to file her intervention in Trial Cause

Number 20-39251-P. Barnes’s petition is not timely. Accordingly, the petition for a

writ of mandamus is dismissed.

1
Barnes’s mandamus petition includes complaints about the statutory probate
court’s rulings in Trial Cause Number 20-39251-P. Barnes also attempted to file a
notice of appeal from the statutory probate court’s orders concerning Barnes’s
intervention in Estate of Bednorz. As a vexatious litigant Barnes must obtain
permission from the local administrative judge before she may proceed in a Texas
court. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 11.102(f). The Clerk of the Court
may not file an appeal presented pro se by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling
order unless the litigant obtains an order from the appropriate administrative judge
permitting the filing. Id. § 11.103(a).
2
PETITION DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on June 4, 2025
Opinion Delivered June 5, 2025

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Chambers, JJ.

3