Peter Beasley v. Society of Information Management, Dallas Area Chapter Janis O'Bryan and Nellson Burns ( 2019 )

Order entered September 13, 2019
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00607-CV
PETER BEASLEY, Appellant
V.
SOCIETY OF INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, DALLAS AREA CHAPTER;
JANIS O'BRYAN; AND NELLSON BURNS, Appellees
On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-1 8-05278
ORDER
Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Nowell
Before the Court is appellant’s motion for rehearing of our September 11, 2019 order
denying his first opposed motion for emergency temporary orders. Appellant states we
incorrectly defined the scope of the appeal in the order and asks for a correction. We GRANT
the motion and VACATE our September 11th order. The following is now the order on the
motion for emergency temporary orders.
The underlying suit in this appeal was filed by appellant. On appellees’ motion, the trial
court declared appellant vexatious pursuant to chapter 11 of the Texas Civil Practice and
Remedies Code, ordered him to post bond in the amount of $422,064 as security to continue the
suit, and required him to obtain permission from the appropriate local administrative judge prior
to filing any new suits. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 11.051, 11.055, 11.101.
Appellant failed to post the bond, and the suit was dismissed. See id. § 11.056. This appeal
challenges the order declaring appellant vexatious.
Asserting the trial court impermissibly denied him hearings on his motion for new trial
and motion challenging defense counsel’s authority to defend against the suit, appellant has filed
an opposed first amended motion for emergency temporary orders. Specifically, he asks the
Court to direct the trial court to “not interfere with [him] obtaining [] hearing[s].” And, because
the trial court’s plenary power will soon expire, he also asks we extend the plenary power.1
Civil practice and remedies code section 11.052 provides that, on the filing of a motion
for an order declaring a plaintiff vexatious, “the litigation is stayed.” See id. § 11.052. If the
motion is granted, the stay remains in effect unless and until appellant posts security. Drum v.
Calhoun, 299 S.W.3d 360, 369 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied).
Because appellant failed to post the bond, the stay remains in place. Accordingly, we
DENY the motion.
Appellant’s motion to recuse Justices Lana Myers and Ada Brown remains pending.
/s/ KEN MOLBERG
JUSTICE
1
Appellant has a third request, that we direct the trial court “to not interfere with [him] filing court documents in support of this appeal,” but he
acknowledges both the Clerk of this Court and the trial court clerk have accepted his filings.