What did the court decide?

The court dismissed both appeals because the appellant said he no longer wanted to pursue them.

Who is affected by this decision?

Only the appellant, John Lewis Jr., and the appellate proceedings in these two appeals; any pending motions in those appeals were also dismissed as moot.

Why were the appeals dismissed?

Appellant's counsel filed a notice of dismissal and, after a court-ordered hearing, the appellant testified he no longer wished to appeal since he was no longer committed.

Can this dismissal be undone or appealed?

Because the appellant personally testified he did not wish to continue, there is no active appeal to pursue; a party could seek relief only by following applicable procedural rules, such as a motion for reinstatement if a valid basis exists, but reinstatement is not guaranteed.

In Re: The Commitment of John Lewis Jr. v. the State of Texas

Docket 01-26-00053-CV

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilDismissed

Filed: Apr 16, 2026 · 2 weeks ago
Jurisdiction: Texas
Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Type: Lead Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Dismissed
Docket: 01-26-00053-CV

Appeals from a probate court writ of commitment and an order authorizing medication

Summary

The Court of Appeals considered two appeals by John Lewis Jr. challenging a January 5, 2026 commitment to Kingwood Pines and an order authorizing medication. Appellant's counsel filed a notice of dismissal and the court treated it as a motion to dismiss. After abating the appeals for a hearing, the trial court docket showed appellant testified he no longer wished to pursue the appeals because he was no longer committed. The court lifted the abatement and granted the motion, dismissing both appeals and any pending motions as moot.

Issues Decided

Whether the appeals should be dismissed based on appellant's indication that he no longer wishes to pursue them
Whether any pending motions in the appeals should be dismissed as moot after dismissal of the appeals

Court's Reasoning

The court treated counsel's notice of dismissal as a motion to dismiss and followed its prior order to abate and obtain a hearing to confirm appellant's intent. Appellant testified he no longer wished to pursue the appeals because he was no longer committed, so the court concluded dismissal was appropriate under the appellate rules. Dismissing the appeals rendered other motions moot, so those were dismissed as well.

Authorities Cited

Texas Rules of Appellate ProcedureTEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a), 43.2(f)

Parties

Appellant: John Lewis Jr.
Judge: Per Curiam (Justices Gunn, Caughey, and Morgan)

Key Dates

Opinion issued: 2026-04-16
Orders appealed (commitment and medication authorization): 2026-01-05
Counsel's notice of dismissal filed: 2026-02-05
Court abated appeals: 2026-03-19
Hearing record filed showing appellant's testimony: 2026-04-01

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult counsel about reinstatement options
If appellant changes his mind or believes dismissal was improper, he should promptly consult an attorney to evaluate whether a motion to reinstate or other relief is available under the appellate rules.
2
Confirm trial-court status and records
Parties should verify the current commitment and medication-authority status in the probate court and obtain certified records if further proceedings are contemplated.
3
Close out pending administrative matters
If you represented a party in the appeals, file any necessary paperwork to terminate appellate representation and notify clients of the dismissal outcome.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The court dismissed both appeals because the appellant said he no longer wanted to pursue them.
Who is affected by this decision?: Only the appellant, John Lewis Jr., and the appellate proceedings in these two appeals; any pending motions in those appeals were also dismissed as moot.
Why were the appeals dismissed?: Appellant's counsel filed a notice of dismissal and, after a court-ordered hearing, the appellant testified he no longer wished to appeal since he was no longer committed.
Can this dismissal be undone or appealed?: Because the appellant personally testified he did not wish to continue, there is no active appeal to pursue; a party could seek relief only by following applicable procedural rules, such as a motion for reinstatement if a valid basis exists, but reinstatement is not guaranteed.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Opinion issued April 16, 2026




                                      In The

                               Court of Appeals
                                      For The

                          First District of Texas
                             ————————————
                               NO. 01-26-00047-CV
                               NO. 01-26-00053-CV
                            ———————————
       IN RE: THE COMMITMENT OF JOHN LEWIS JR., Appellant



                   On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 4
                             Harris County, Texas
                  Trial Court Case No. i385936 and i385936-01


                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      In appellate case number 01-26-00047-CV, appellant appealed from a writ of

commitment, signed January 5, 2026, committing him to Kingwood Pines for

observation and/or treatment for a period not to exceed forty-five (45) days. In case

number 01-26-00053-CV, appellant appealed the order signed January 5, 2026,

authorizing the administration of medication. On February 5, 2026, appellant’s
counsel filed a notice of dismissal of the two appeals, stating that she had been

unable to meet with appellant and believes that appellant no longer wishes to pursue

the appeal. We construe this notice as a motion to dismiss.

      The Court issued an order in both appeals on March 19, 2026, abating and

remanding to the trial court for a hearing to determine if appellant had abandoned

the appeals or no longer wishes to pursue the appeals. On April 1, 2026, the hearing

record was filed containing appellant’s testimony that, because he was no longer

committed to Kingwood Pines, he did not wish to pursue the appeals of the two

orders of January 5, 2026.

      We lift the abatement and reinstate the appeals on the active docket. Because

appellant has testified that he no longer wishes to appeal the orders committing him

to Kingwood Pines and authorizing Kingwood Pines to administer medication, we

grant appellant’s motion to dismiss the two appeals.

      We dismiss these appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a), 43.2(f). Any other

pending motions in these cases are dismissed as moot.

                                 PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Gunn, Caughey, and Morgan.




                                         2