In Re Johnson (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jul. 23, 2009)(per curiam denial)
(allegedly void final orders dismissing cases with prejudice are nevertheless appealable; mandamus relief
MOTION OR WRIT DENIED: Per Curiam
Before Justices Anderson, Guzman and Boyce
14-09-00614-CV In Re R. Wayne Johnson
Appeal from 10th District Court of Galveston County (judge's name not on docket)
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed July 23, 2009.
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
IN RE R. WAYNE JOHNSON, Relator
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On July 6, 2009, relator, R. Wayne Johnson, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this court. See
Tex. Gov't Code Ann. ' 22.221 (Vernon 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator
asks this court to compel the Honorable David Garner, presiding judge of the 10th District Court of
Galveston County, and the Honorable John Ellisor, presiding judge of the 22nd District Court of
Galveston County, to set aside as void their respective orders dismissing his underlying lawsuits
As an initial matter, relator's petition fails to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1 (requiring relator to file affidavit of indigence if relator is seeking to
proceed in appellate court without advance payment of costs); Tex. R. App. P. 52.7(a)(1)
(requiring relator to file certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to relator's claim
for relief and was filed in underlying proceeding). Notwithstanding these deficiencies, relator still
cannot prevail on his request for mandamus relief.
To be entitled to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus, a relator must show that the trial
court clearly abused its discretion and he has no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Team Rocket,
L.P., 256 S.W.3d 257, 259 (Tex. 2008) (orig. proceeding). Relator complains that the two orders
signed by Judge Ellisor and Judge Garner are void and, therefore, not appealable. Both orders,
upon finding that relator had filed the respective underlying lawsuits in violation of the order finding
him to be a vexatious litigant, and that he had filed the underlying lawsuits without obtaining prior
permission from the local administrative judge, dismissed the underlying cases with prejudice.
A void judgment can become final for purposes of appeal. Newsom v. Ballinger Indep. Sch. Dist.,
213 S.W.3d 375, 379, 380 (Tex. App.- Austin 2006, no pet.); In re Vlasak, 141 S.W.3d 233, 237-
38 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding). Each order “disposes of the entire case" and
directs that “[p]laintiff shall take nothing by this suit." Having disposed of all claims, the orders are
final and thus are appealable even if void. See In re Vlasak, 141 S.W.3d at 237B38 (holding court
can render final judgment even if it lacks personal jurisdiction - judgment is void if challenged, but
no less final); Estate of Courvier, No. 04-07-00469-CV, 2007 WL 2935809, at *1 (Tex. App.- San
Antonio Oct. 10, 2007, no pet.) (mem. op.) (assuming, without deciding, trial court's judgment is
void, appellant was required to file timely notice of appeal). Therefore, we need not determine
whether either order is void because relator has an adequate remedy by appeal. See In re
Hamel, 180 S.W.3d 226, 229 (Tex. App- San Antonio 2005, orig. proceeding) (stating that
mandamus relief is not available if the order complained of is appealable because appeal is
almost always adequate remedy).
Relator has not established his entitlement to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus.
Accordingly, we deny relator's petition for writ of mandamus.
Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Guzman, and Boyce.
 On July 10, 2008, Judge Garner signed an order dismissing relator's claims in cause no.
08CV0489, styled R. Wayne Johnson v. All Doctors, et al. Relator's appeal from Judge Garner's
order is pending in this court in cause no. 14-08-00671-CV. On April 17, 2009, Judge Ellisor
signed an order dismissing relator's claims in cause no. 09CV0196, styled R. Wayne Johnson v.
Sharon Howell, et al.