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


Menu:
  •                                                                                              ACCEPTED
    03-15-00637-CV
    7997231
    THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    11/25/2015 3:59:34 PM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    CLERK
    COURT OF APPEALS NO. 03-15-00637 -CV
    TRIAL COURT CASE NO. D-1-GN-12-002873              FILED IN
    3rd COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    AIRLINX COMMUNICATIONS, INC.                  §     COURT     OF   APPEALS
    11/25/2015 3:59:34 PM
    §                   JEFFREY D. KYLE
    §                        Clerk
    Appellant,
    §
    v.                                            §
    §     THIRD DISTRICT OF
    §     TEXAS
    ULTRA ELECTRONICS ADVANCED                    §
    TACTICALSYSTEMS, INC.                         §
    §
    Appellee.                                §      TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
    TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:
    A. AIRLINX's president Tjalling Hoiska stated by affidavit on November 12,
    2015 at 1}3 that "The Notice of Appeal for this trial court case was
    mailed to the district clerk's office on or before August 14, 2015."
    The affidavit tracked exactly what the Court of Appeals asked for in its
    November 3, 20151etter at 1}2. Under Rule 9.2(b)(2) of the Texas Rules
    of Appellate Procedure, the court "may consider other proof" of the date
    of mailing.   So the Court asked for "other proof' and the Appellant
    provided it. The Appellee cannot disprove the Appellant's affidavit. The
    1
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS
    APPEAL
    Appellee's accusation is unsubstantiated and uncalled for so the
    Appellant respectfully asks the court to disregard it and consider the
    Notice of Appeal filed timely.
    B. The Appellant's trial attorney will not continue his fee agreement to
    completion.    That fact coupled with an adverse arbitration award
    prejudiced the Appellant's ability to gain other legal representation. The
    Appellant has spent much time trying to retain counsel to represent it.
    However, insofar as the case's ministerial tasks are concerned including
    filing the Notice of Appeal, the Appellant's president and sole
    owner/shareholder has the authority to perform such tasks for his
    company even though it is an incorporated small business. Kunstoplast
    of Am., Inc. v. Formosa Plastics Corp., USA, 
    937 S.W.2d 455
    , 456 (Tex.
    1996) ("We hold, however, that Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
    40(a)(1) and 41 (a)(1) do not preclude a nonlawyer from performing the
    specific ministerial task of depositing cash with a clerk in lieu of a cost
    bond.")
    Tjalling Hoiska, president and sole owner/shareholder respectfully
    requests the right to represent his small business pro se because he
    owns it 100%.        No one else will be hurt by Tjalling Hoiska's
    2
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS
    APPEAL
    representation of his own interest.       If the court will not grant Tjalling
    Hoiska the right to represent his small business, then he respectfully
    asks the court for an extension of time to retain counsel to represent the
    small business in addition to any other extensions of time. As alternate
    relief at least 45 days is requested to retain counsel.
    Lastly, the Appellant's first brief is due on December 3, 2015.           The
    Appellant respectfully requests that this brief's deadline be extended by
    45 days from this date or 90 days from this date if the Appellant is
    required to retain counsel.
    PRAYER
    Based on the foregoing, Appellant AIRLINX Communications, Inc.
    respectfully requests that the Court deny the Appellee's Motion to
    Dismiss Appeal and enter an order dismissing the Appellee's Motion to
    Dismiss Appeal and taxing all costs against Appellee.
    Respectfully submitted,
    ~({?.~
    Tjalling Ho1ska (thoiska@airlinx.com)
    AIRLINX Communications, Inc. (Appellant)
    Box 253
    Greenville, NH 03048
    Tel: (603) 291-0433
    Date:   Nt>VeJ11ke..-t 2-...'i, 2015
    3
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS
    APPEAL
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing
    instrument, Appellant's Response to Appellee's Motion to Dismiss Appeal, was
    delivered via efile on November 25, 2015 to the following:
    Attorneys for the Defendant
    Mark L. Hawkins (MHawkins@abaustin.com)
    Jeffrey J. Hobbs (JHobbs@abaustin.com)
    Andrew F. York (ayork@abaustin.com)
    Armbrust & Brown, PLLC
    100 Congress Ave., Suite 1300
    Austin, Texas 78701 -2744
    (512) 435-2371 - Direct Dial
    (512) 435-2360- Facsimile
    ·~Y~
    T JALLING HOISKA
    Date: No\f®   ke.r-25 , 2015
    4
    APPELLANT'S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO DISMISS
    APPEAL
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-15-00637-CV

Filed Date: 11/25/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/30/2016