Airlinx Communications, Inc. v. Ultra Electronics Advanced Tactical Systems, Inc. ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                   ACCEPTED
    03-15-00637-CV
    7834074
    THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    11/16/2015 8:54:16 AM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    CLERK
    NO. 03-15-00637-CV
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE           FILED IN
    3rd COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   AUSTIN, TEXAS
    _________________________________________________________
    11/16/2015 8:54:16 AM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    AIRLINX COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,                   Clerk
    APPELLANT,
    v.
    ULTRA ELECTRONICS ADVANCED TACTICAL SYSTEMS, INC.,
    APPELLEE.
    _________________________________________________________
    From The District Court Of Travis County, 353rd Judicial District,
    Cause No. D-1-GN-12-002873; The Honorable Karin Crump Presiding
    APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
    JEFFREY J. HOBBS
    State Bar No. 24012837
    jhobbs@abaustin.com
    MARK L. HAWKINS
    State Bar No. 00790843
    mhawkins@abaustin.com
    ANDREW F. YORK
    State Bar No. 24066318
    ayork@abaustin.com
    ARMBRUST & BROWN, PLLC
    100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
    Austin, Texas 78701
    (512) 435-2300 – telephone
    (512) 435-2360 – facsimile
    ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS:
    Appellee Ultra Advanced Tactical Systems, Inc. files this Motion to Dismiss
    Appeal, and respectfully shows the Court as follows:
    A.    Appellant’s Notice of Appeal Was Untimely.
    The Court should dismiss Appellant’s appeal because it was not timely
    perfected.   The trial court signed its Final Judgment and Order Confirming
    Arbitration Award on July 15, 2015. CR 391-397. As the Court noted, Appellant
    was required to file its notice of appeal on or before August 14, 2015, but
    Appellant’s Notice of Appeal was not filed until October 7, 2015.           CR 403;
    November 3, 2015 letter from Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk, to Tjalling Hoiska. To avoid
    dismissal of the appeal for want of jurisdiction, the Court required Appellant to
    provide either (1) proof of timely mailing of the Notice of Appeal to the trial court,
    or (2) an affidavit swearing that the filing was mailed to the district clerk on or
    before August 14, 2015. November 3, 2015 letter from Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk, to
    Tjalling Hoiska.
    In response, Appellant did not submit proof that it ever mailed its Notice of
    Appeal to the district clerk, timely or otherwise. Instead, Appellant’s president,
    Tjalling Hoiska, filed an affidavit parroting the language of the Court’s directive,
    swearing under oath that “[t]he Notice of Appeal for this trial court case was
    mailed to the district clerk’s office on or before August 14, 2015,” without even
    2
    offering a date on which the Notice of Appeal was supposedly mailed. Affidavit of
    Tjalling P. Hoiska at ¶ 3. Mr. Hoiska’s affidavit is at best confused, and at worst
    false testimony.
    Mr. Hoiska signed the Notice of Appeal on October 7, 2015, the same day it
    was electronically filed with the district court. CR 403. Mr. Hoiska now claims
    that despite signing the Notice of Appeal on October 7, 2015, he had previously
    mailed it to the district clerk on some unidentified date, before it was actually
    signed and filed. Moreover, in its Docketing Statement, Appellant confirmed that
    the Notice of Appeal was filed on October 7, 2015, and where the form requests,
    “[i]f mailed to the trial court clerk, also give the date mailed,” Appellant left the
    answer blank, indicating that the Notice of Appeal was never mailed. Docketing
    Statement at § V.
    Given those prior representations and circumstances, Mr. Hoiska’s sworn
    testimony that he timely mailed a post-dated notice of appeal to the district clerk
    strains credibility. The Court should disregard it, and dismiss Appellant’s appeal
    for want of jurisdiction.
    B.    Appellant Cannot Pursue This Appeal Pro Se.
    As an alternative, the Court need not resolve Mr. Hoiska’s dubious
    testimony, and instead can dismiss this appeal because Appellant is not represented
    by an attorney. Appellant is a corporation, and purports to be represented by its
    3
    president, Mr. Hoiska, who is not an attorney.         Docketing Statement at § I
    (confirming Appellant’s organizational status and its appearance pro se) and § X
    (stating “N/A” for Tjalling Hoiska’s State Bar number); Affidavit of Tjalling P.
    Hoiska at ¶ 2 (testifying that Tjalling Hoiska is Appellant’s president).
    In Texas, a corporation must be represented by a licensed attorney, and it
    cannot act pro se through a corporate officer who is not an attorney. Chavez v.
    Pugh, No. 03-15-00395-CV, 
    2015 WL 5781113
    at *1 n.1 (Tex. App.—Austin Oct.
    2, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (noting corporation’s president could not represent
    corporation pro se); Rose Air, LLC v. Brazoria County Appraisal Dist., No. 01-13-
    01085-CV, 
    2014 WL 2538630
    at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 5, 2014,
    no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing limited liability company’s appeal because it was
    not represented by counsel); MHL Homebuilder LLC v. Dabal/Graphic Resource,
    No. 14-05-00295-CV, 
    2005 WL 1404475
    at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]
    June 16, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op.) (same).
    Because Appellant is not represented by counsel, the Court should dismiss
    Appellant’s appeal.
    4
    PRAYER
    Based on the foregoing, Appellee Ultra Electronics Advanced Tactical
    Systems, Inc. respectfully requests that the Court grant its Motion to Dismiss
    Appeal and enter an order dismissing Appellant’s appeal and taxing all costs
    against Appellant.
    Respectfully submitted,
    /s/ Jeffrey J. Hobbs
    JEFFREY J. HOBBS
    State Bar No. 24012837
    jhobbs@abaustin.com
    MARK L. HAWKINS
    State Bar No. 00790843
    mhawkins@abaustin.com
    ANDREW F. YORK
    State Bar No. 24066318
    ayork@abaustin.com
    ARMBRUST & BROWN, PLLC
    100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1300
    Austin, Texas 78701
    (512) 435-2300 – telephone
    (512) 435-2360 – facsimile
    ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
    I hereby certify that the undersigned counsel for Appellee conferred with
    Tjalling Hoiska, Appellant’s president, regarding the foregoing motion, and Mr.
    Hoiska has stated that Appellant opposes the motion.
    /s/ Jeffrey J. Hobbs
    Jeffrey J. Hobbs
    5
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served
    by electronic filing and electronic mail to the following on November 16, 2015:
    Tjalling P. Hoiska
    Airlinx Communications, Inc.
    Box 253
    Greenville, NH 03048
    thoiska@airlinx.com
    /s/ Jeffrey J. Hobbs
    Jeffrey J. Hobbs
    6
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-15-00637-CV

Filed Date: 11/16/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/30/2016