The opinion
Opinion issued April 28, 2020
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-20-00103-CV
———————————
GERALD EUGENE SMALLEY A/K/A YAZID MALIK BEY, Appellant
V.
FOUR BROWN AND WHITE PAINT HORSES AND ONE BLACK AND
WHITE PAINT HORSE, Appellees
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1147414
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Gerald Eugene Smalley also known as Yazid Malik Bey, attempts
to appeal from the December 27, 2019 order of disposition on trial de novo of the
right to possession of four brown and white paint horses and one black and white
paint horse ordered seized by the Justice Court. We dismiss the appeal.
On December 13, 2019, the Justice Court ordered five horses seized from
Gerrald Eugene Smalley also known as Yazid Malik Bey. Bey appealed that ruling
to the County Court at Law No. 2, and after a non-jury trial de novo, that court signed
an order determining that the animals were cruelly treated or abandoned by Bey and
ordering that Bey was divested of the seized animals. Bey then filed a notice of
appeal.
Section 821.025 permits an owner, who has been divested of ownership of an
animal, to appeal that order to the county court or county court at law. See TEX.
HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 821.025(a). The decision of the county court at law “is
final and may not be further appealed.” Id. § 821.025(e); see Madison v. Harris
County, No. 01-17-00675-CV, 2017 WL 4414035, at * 1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] Oct. 5, 2017, no pet.) (dismissing attempted appeal from county court at law
order on trial de novo of right to possession of animals under Section 821.023
because no appeal is permitted under Section 821.025(e)).
The Court issued a notice to Bey concerning our intent to dismiss this appeal
for lack of jurisdiction, noting that no appeal is permitted from the County Court at
Law’s order. The order was returned as undeliverable on February 28, 2020.
Appellee, Harris County, filed a motion to dismiss, including a certificate of service
2
to Bey at the same address that this Court has for Bey. No response to this Court’s
notice, or to Harris County’s motion, was received.1
Because Bey is prohibited by statute from appealing the County Court at Law
order, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Any pending motions are
dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Kelly and Goodman.
1
Appellant is responsible for updating his mailing address. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.1(b)
(requiring pro se appellants to give the party’s mailing address and email address
whenever that party files any document with the Court).
3