X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Over the past 15 years, Kenneth L. Harris filed 30 pro se lawsuits in Dallas County and has been held in contempt of court 12 times. Neither court orders nor injunctions seemed to dissuade Harris from filing suits. When the State Bar of Texas obtained a permanent injunction prohibiting Harris from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, Harris violated the injunction and continued to file lawsuits. Five of Harris’ suits have been dismissed with prejudice since 2002. Harris’ suit against Rose * Walker, a firm, alleging assault and race harassment was one of the dismissed cases. The suit was based on injuries allegedly sustained when Harris was staging a one-man protest in the West End and an unidentified person threw a pitcher of clear liquid out of the window of an office building onto Harris’ head. Harris occasionally described the clear liquid as water. The case was dismissed with prejudice in October 2004. Undeterred, Harris filed the same suit again in March 2005, substituting Martin Rose for Rose * Walker. In both suits, Harris demanded $1 million in non-economic damages for anxiety, itchy skin, undue nervousness and severe headaches. Rose responded by filing a motion to declare Harris a vexatious litigant and requested that the court require Harris to furnish security to assure payment for attorneys’ fees and expenses. Following an evidentiary hearing, the court signed an order finding that Harris was a vexatious litigant and requiring Harris to furnish security within 30 days of the entry of the order. When Harris failed to furnish the required security, the court dismissed the case with prejudice. Harris, appearing pro se, asserted that the trial court erred when it dismissed his claims with prejudice after he failed to comply with the court’s order declaring him a vexatious litigant. HOLDING:Affirmed. The court reviewed the trial court’s determination that Harris was a vexatious litigant under an abuse of discretion standard. Under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code �11.051, the court noted, a trial court may find that a plaintiff is a vexatious litigant if the defendant shows that there is a reasonable probability that the plaintiff will not prevail in the litigation and the plaintiff, acting pro se, has prosecuted, maintained or commenced at least five other litigations that have been determined adversely to him within the seven-year period preceding the motion. Based on its review of the record, the court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it found that Harris was a vexatious litigant who was not likely to prevail in the litigation. Harris did not identify Rose as the person who allegedly threw the water until after his first suit was dismissed and he reviewed the firm’s Web site, the court stated. The evidence also showed that Rose was not in the office at the time of the incident, the court noted. In addition, the court noted evidence that the police report Harris filed stated that the water was thrown from a third-floor window. OPINION:Richter, J.; Morris, Whittington and Richter, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.