Robert Roy Butcher, Texas inmate # 719502, appeals the dismissal, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l), of his pro se action asserting civil rights violations arising from the sale of property in a Texas probate proceeding.

Butcher may not seek a reversal of the Texas probate court’s judgment simply by casting his complaint in the form of a civil rights action. See Phinizy v. State of Ala., 847 F.2d 282, 283 (5th Cir. 1988); Hagerty v. Succession of Clement, 749 F.2d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 1984). Because Butcher’s claims are inextricably intertwined with his probate action, the federal district court had no jurisdiction to consider them. See Phinizy, 847 F.2d at 283; Hagerty, 749 F.2d at 220. Because the appeal lacks arguable merit, it is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Butcher is warned that the district court’s dismissal of his complaint as frivolous and this court’s dismissal of his appeal each count as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that, if he accumulates three strikes, he will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). He is also warned that any future filing or *253 prosecution of paid frivolous appeals will invite the imposition of monetary sanctions.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.