In In re Luckett (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 107, the Court of Appeal issued a written order notifying Luckett that it appeared he was a vexatious litigant based on his having filed 43 different appeals and writs as well as unmeritorious motions, pleadings, and other papers. The order notified Luckett the court was considering entering a prefiling order declaring him a vexatious litigant and prohibiting him from filing any new litigation without first obtaining leave of the presiding judge. (Id. at p. 108.) The order directed the clerk to set the matter for hearing on a given date, advised Luckett of his right to appear before the court at that time and present argument and evidence on whether he was a vexatious litigant and whether the court should enter the proposed prefiling order. (Ibid.) Luckett submitted written materials disputing whether he met the criteria to be declared a vexatious litigant but did not appear at the scheduled hearing. (Id. at p. 109.) The court considered Luckett's written arguments, found him to be a vexatious litigant within the meaning of the statute, and entered a prefiling order barring him from filing new litigation without the permission of the presiding justice. (Id. at p. 110.)