R.D. Tips, Inc. v. Virginia Jett ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                            ACCEPTED
    03-13-00336-CV
    5225335
    THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    5/11/2015 10:21:48 AM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    CLERK
    CASE NO. 03-13-00336-CV
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS          FILED IN
    3rd COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRD COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT AUSTIN, TEXAS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS        5/11/2015 10:21:48 AM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    Clerk
    R.D. TIPS, INC.,
    Appellant
    v.
    VIRGINIA JETT,
    Appellee
    Appeal from the 419th District Court, Travis County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. D-1-GN-11-003799
    Hon. Rhonda Hurley, Judge Presiding
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S
    MOTION TO EXPEDITE THE MANDATE
    Jonathan D. Pauerstein
    State Bar No. 15637500
    ROSENTHAL P AUERSTEIN
    SANDOLOSKI AGATHER LLP
    755 E. Mulberry, Suite 200
    San Antonio, Texas 78212
    Telephone: (210) 225-5000
    Facsimile: (210) 354-4034
    ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT,
    R.D. TIPS, INC.
    1
    477601.1
    80592.00013
    To The Honorable Third Court of Appeals:
    Appellant, R.D. Tips, Inc., in opposition to Appellee's Motion To Expedite
    The Mandate, states the following:
    1.    Appellant has superseded the judgment below as permitted by law.
    Accordingly, while this case is on appeal, Appellee has received the protection
    afforded by law and Appellant is entitled to pursue the appellate process to its
    conclusion. Nonetheless, Appellee seeks to expedite the issuance of the mandate
    based on conclusory allegations that she needs funds due to unspecified financial
    hardship.
    2.    Appellant has until June 12th to file a petition for review in the
    Supreme Court of Texas, which it is entitled to file under Texas law.
    3.   The mandate can only be expedited upon a showing of good cause.
    Tex. R. App. P. 18.1(c). 1 Appellee, failing to carry this burden, points to nothing
    that is not true of many plaintiffs who hold money judgments that are on appeal.
    While she has been unable to execute upon the superseded judgment, that is always
    so when a defendant appeals an adverse money judgment and posts a supersedeas
    bond to secure the plaintiff during the appellate process. And, while Appellee says
    Appellee's motion is unverified and not supported by affidavit, which alone warrants its
    denial. Cf Andrews v. Twin Montana, Inc., 
    547 S.W.2d 54
    , 56 (Tex. Civ. App.-Fort Worth
    1977, no writ) ("the motion of appellant for extension of time for filing his brief is not verified
    and ... there is no affidavit presented in support of it. Under these circumstances appellant has
    not proved anything by his motion; he has merely made some unsupported allegations.").
    2
    477601.1
    80592.00013
    she needs the money awarded in the judgment, that too is likely to be so in similar
    situations.
    4.     Were Appellee's conclusory claims sufficient to show good cause for
    expediting the mandate and denying Appellant the right to supersede the judgment
    until the appellate process is exhausted, then good cause for the same relief would
    exist in most cases in which defendants appeal from money judgments. The good
    cause standard demands more, but Appellee has not provided it.
    5.     Appellee has not alleged, let alone proven, facts demonstrating that
    there    IS   good cause for expediting the issuance of the mandate and thereby
    abrogating Appellant's right to pursue all appellate avenues for review of the
    superseded judgment. Appellee thus has not sustained her burden to establish good
    cause.
    For the foregoing reasons, Appellee's motion should be denied.
    Respectfully submitted,
    J o athan D. Pauerstein
    State Bar No. 15637500
    ROSENTHAL PAUERSTEIN
    SANDOLOSKI A GATHER LLP
    755 E. Mulberry, Suite 200
    San Antonio, Texas 78212
    Telephone: (21 0) 225-5000
    Facsimile: (21 0) 354-4034
    jpauerstein@rpsalaw .com
    3
    477601.1
    80592.00013
    ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT,
    R.D. TIPS, INC.
    CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
    The undersigned counsel certifies that this document contains 63 8 words
    (counting all parts of the document). The body text is in 14 point font, and the
    footnote text is in 12 point font.
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the
    foregoing Appellant's Response To Motion To Expedite The Mandate was served
    via United States Mail on this 11th day of May, 2015, upon the following counsel
    of record:
    Eric J. Taube
    Taube Summers Harrison Taylor
    Meinzer Brown LLP
    100 Congress Avenue, 18th Floor
    Austin, Texas 78701
    4
    477601.1
    80592.00013
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-13-00336-CV

Filed Date: 5/11/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/29/2016