In the Estate of Everlean Scott v. the State of Texas

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-25-00228-CV
___________________________

IN THE ESTATE OF EVERLEAN SCOTT, DECEASED

On Appeal from Probate Court No. 1
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2024-PR02933-1

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Wallach and Walker, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Glendell Thompson, pro se, attempts to bring a restricted appeal of

the trial court’s November 21, 2024 order admitting a will to probate as a muniment of

title. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c), 30.

To sustain a restricted appeal, the filing party must show that (1) he filed notice

of the restricted appeal within six months after the judgment was signed; (2) he was a

party to the underlying lawsuit; (3) he did not participate in the hearing that resulted in

the judgment complained of and did not timely file any post-judgment motions or

requests for findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (4) error is apparent on the

face of the record. Ex parte E.H., 602 S.W.3d 486, 495 (Tex. 2020). The first three

requirements are jurisdictional. Id. at 497 (“An appellant who satisfies the first three

requirements establishes the court’s jurisdiction and must then establish error from the

face of the record to prevail in the restricted appeal.”).

Thompson filed his pro se notice of restricted appeal within six months of the

probate court’s order, but the record does not reflect that he was a party to the

underlying lawsuit.1 Accordingly, we dismiss this restricted appeal for want of

jurisdiction. See id.

1
Although appellee Joyce Britt contends that Thompson is not an “interested
person” under the Estates Code, the sparse record reflects that Thompson claims to be
the decedent’s grandson and seeks to recover one of the decedent’s assets, and his
notice of restricted appeal and his appellate brief indicate that he seeks to challenge the
will based on the decedent’s alleged lack of testamentary capacity and Britt’s alleged
undue influence. See Tex. Est. Code Ann. § 22.018(1) (stating that an “interested

2
/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Bonnie Sudderth
Chief Justice

Delivered: November 6, 2025

person” includes an heir “or any other having a property right in or claim against an
estate being administered”); see also id. § 22.015 (defining “heir” as “a person who is
entitled under the statutes of descent and distribution to a part of the estate of a
decedent who dies intestate”), § 201.001(a)–(b) (identifying to whom an estate passes if
a person dies intestate).

An “interested person” may file a bill of review in the court in which the probate
proceedings were held to have the complained-of order “revised and corrected on a
showing of error in the order.” Id. § 55.251(a). However, “[a] bill of review to revise
and correct an order . . . may not be filed more than two years after the date of the
order.” Id. § 55.251(b). Because the probate court’s order was entered on November
21, 2024, if Thompson is an “interested person,” then he has two years from that date
to take this action in the probate court.

3