Tan Duc USA v. Jimmy Tran ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                              ACCEPTED
    01-14-00539-CV
    FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
    HOUSTON, TEXAS
    9/24/2015 4:50:55 PM
    CHRISTOPHER PRINE
    CLERK
    NO. 01-14-00539-CV
    FILED IN
    1st COURT OF APPEALS
    HOUSTON, TEXAS
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS   9/24/2015 4:50:55 PM
    FOR THE     FIRST SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICTCHRISTOPHER
    OF TEXAS A. PRINE
    Clerk
    HOUSTON, TEXAS
    HOANG-YEN THI DANG, and
    TAN DUC CONSTRUCTION LIMITED COMPANY,
    Appellants
    v.
    JIMMY TRAN,
    Appellee and Conditional Cross-Appellant
    TRAN’S MOTION TO EXTEND and BIFURCATE HIS DEADLINES
    FOR FILING BRIEFS AS APPELLEE and
    as CONDITIONAL CROSS-APPELLANT
    TO THE HONORABLE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS:
    Tran (Appellee, and Conditional Cross-Appellant) was assigned the
    deadline of September 24 to file his Brief (as Appellee and Conditional Cross-
    Appellant as to Appellant and Conditional Cross-Appellee Dang) by a prior order
    of this Court. (That Tran would file a single brief as to Dang, both as Appellee
    and as Conditional Cross-Appellant, and the lack of objection to the conditionality
    of Tran’s cross-appeal as to Dang, were subsumed by an agreed motion made and
    accepted earlier in this appeal.)(The conditionality of Tran’s Cross-Appeal is that
    Tran does not wish to seek appellate relief as to Dang, his judgment debtor, unless
    this Court grants relief to Dang. In common speech, Tran will choose his bird in
    the hand, if it stays there.)
    This motion comes to pass because none of the Jury Questions and Jury
    Instructions Tran submitted and the Trial Court rejected are in the Clerk’s Record
    on Appeal or Clerk’s Supplemental Record on Appeal, nor are they in the “JIMS”
    electronic case file available online to Tran through the District Clerk’s website,
    nor (Tran started asking some weeks ago) has the Chief Clerk of the trial court yet
    been able to locate the paper originals of those proposed-but-rejected Jury
    Questions and Instructions. The trial court clerk reports to Tran that she is looking
    for the paper originals, and the court staff have reported to Tran they lately have
    requested the actual paper file to be “pulled” from the Clerk’s storage facility in
    order that they may search for the missing Tran’s proposed-but-rejected Jury
    Questions and Instructions. Tran has assiduously pursued the trail of these
    necessary documents since the omission became manifest. Tran is unable to
    prepare and file his brief as a Conditional Cross-Appellant without reference to the
    Jury Questions and Jury Instructions he submitted that the Trial Court refused. It
    is unknown to Tran when the Chief Clerk of the Trial Court will conclude her
    inquiry and report either that the papers are utterly missing or that they have been
    2
    located and scanned into the clerk’s electronic record and available for
    supplementation to the appellate record in this Court.
    However, though his present deadline is for filing a single Brief as Appellee
    and as Conditional Cross-Appellant, Tran does not require the missing proposed-
    but-rejected jury questions and instructions in order to prepare the portion of his
    brief as an Appellee responsive to the Appellant Dang’s brief, and so Tran
    proposes that despite the earlier agreed motion to file a single brief (as Appellee
    and Conditional Cross-Appellant) as to Dang that Tran now, to accommodate the
    uncertain time needed to complete the trial court clerk’s continuing search for the
    missing papers, bifurcate his briefing as to Dang into one brief to be filed as
    Appellee as to Dang, and a later brief to be filed as Conditional Cross-Appellant as
    to Dang.
    Tran does not request adjustment of the briefing deadline as to Tan Duc,
    which deadline was set by this Court’s prior order.
    Tran moves for the following relief:
    A.     Permission to bifurcate his briefing as to Dang into an Appellee’s
    Brief responding to Appellant Dang’s brief, and a Conditional Cross-
    Appellant’s Brief as to Dang.
    3
    B.    An extension of Three (3) Weeks from the present deadline to file his
    Appellee’s Brief as to Dang’s Appellant’s Brief.
    C.    An extension of One (1) Month from the present deadline to file his
    Conditional Cross-Appellant’s Brief as to Dang, understanding that
    the trial court clerk’s office’s retrieval of its own paper files and
    search for the missing proposed-but-rejected jury questions and
    instructions are outside Tran’s control, though his requests are direct
    and assiduous and continuing.
    Respectfully submitted,
    /S/ Matt Muller
    Matthew S. Muller
    Texas Bar No. 14648450
    1445 North Loop West, Suite 760
    Houston, Texas 77008
    Tel. (713)227-1888
    Fax. (713)227-1881
    Attorney for Tran
    Certificate of Conference
    By earlier agreement with Dang’s current appellant counsel, ordinary and
    reasonable requests for deadline relief are not opposed. This motion does not
    affect Tan Duc and its counsel has not been contacted.
    /S/
    Matthew Muller
    4
    Certificate of Service
    I will cause the e-filing system to serve a true copy of this instrument on all
    counsel this 24th day of September, 2015.
    /S/
    Matthew Muller
    C:\Users\Matt\Dropbox\TRAN Appellate\motion bifurcate.wpd
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-14-00539-CV

Filed Date: 9/24/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/30/2016