Renovation Genius, LLC v. Beverly Brooks ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                   COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
    FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
    ORDER OF ABATEMENT
    Appellate case name:       Renovation Genius, LLC v. Beverly Brooks
    Appellate case number:     01-21-00063-CV
    Trial court case number: 1129720
    Trial court:               County Civil Court at Law No. 4 of Harris County
    This order addresses two outstanding matters in the above-referenced appeal that require
    action by the trial court, the parties, or both:
    1. LOST OR DESTROYED EXHIBITS (Action required by trial court and all
    parties)
    In conducting its review of the record and arguments on appeal in this case, the Court
    discovered that the exhibits admitted into the evidence at the trial on the merits of the above-
    referenced cause were not included as part of the reporter’s record. Specifically, the reporter’s
    record did not include (1) Plaintiff’s Exhibit Nos. 1-9 or (2) “all proposed exhibits submitted by
    defendant,” even though volume 1, page 10 of the reporter’s record indicates those exhibits were
    admitted into the evidence.
    The Court ordered the official court reporter for the County Civil Court at Law No. 4 of
    Harris County to prepare, certify, and file a supplemental reporter’s record of the exhibits admitted
    into the evidence at the trial. On October 6, 2022, a supplemental reporter’s record containing
    Plaintiff’s Exhibits Nos. 1-9 was filed, but no defendant’s exhibits were included in the
    supplemental record. In an information sheet filed the same day, the court reporter stated that she
    was unable to find “defendant’s proposed exhibits.”
    Rule 34.6(f) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that an appellant is entitled
    to a new trial when the reporter’s record or exhibits are lost or destroyed, under the following
    circumstances:
    (1) if the appellant timely requested a reporter’s record;
    (2) if, without the appellant’s fault, a significant exhibit or a significant portion of
    the court reporter’s notes and records has been lost or destroyed or—if the
    proceedings were electronically recorded—a significant portion of the
    recording has been lost or destroyed or is inaudible;
    (3) if the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the reporter’s record, or the lost or
    destroyed exhibit, is necessary to the appeal’s resolution; and
    (4) if the lost, destroyed or inaudible portion of the reporter’s record cannot be
    replaced by agreement of the parties or with a copy determined by the trial court
    to accurately duplicate with reasonable certainty the original exhibit.
    TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).
    Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand to the trial court to determine the following:
    (1) whether appellant timely requested a reporter’s record; (2) whether without the appellant’s
    fault, significant exhibits and/or portions of the record have been lost or destroyed; (3) whether the
    lost exhibits and/or portions of the record are necessary to appellant’s appeal; and (4) whether the
    parties replace any lost or destroyed exhibits by agreement or, (5) if the lost or destroyed exhibits
    cannot be replaced by agreement of the parties, whether those exhibits can be replaced with copies
    determined by the trial court to accurately duplicate with reasonable certainty the original exhibits.
    The court is directed to reduce its findings on these matters to writing and to have a
    supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this court, together
    with a reporter’s record from any hearing, on or before November 14, 2022. In addition, if any
    of the exhibits can be located or have been lost or destroyed but can be replaced, the court reporter
    shall file a supplemental exhibit volume to the reporter’s record containing the located or replaced
    exhibits on or before November 14, 2022.
    This appeal is removed from submission, abated, treated as a closed case, and removed
    from the Court’s active docket.1 The appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when
    the supplemental clerk’s record and reporter’s record that comply with this order are filed with the
    clerk of this court. The court coordinator of the trial court shall set a hearing date and notify
    the parties.
    2. TIMELINESS OF NOTICE OF APPEAL (Action required by appellant)
    In addition to the issue of lost or destroyed exhibits, there is also a question of jurisdiction
    in this appeal. On October 10, 2022, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that
    appellant’s February 1, 2021 notice of appeal was not timely filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1)
    (notice of appeal must be filed within 90 days after judgment is signed if any party timely files
    motion for new trial). A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant,
    acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by rule 26.1, but within the
    15-day extension period provided by rule 26.3. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner,
    
    959 S.W.2d 615
    , 617–18 (Tex. 1997). Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed within this 15-day
    period, but appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in
    1
    Because the abatement ordered herein requires the court to withdraw this appeal from
    submission, appellee’s motion requesting that the appeal be withdrawn from its October
    25, 2022 submission date is dismissed as moot.
    2
    a timely manner. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), 26.3; Jones v. City of Hous., 
    976 S.W.2d 676
    ,
    677 (Tex. 1998) (holding appellant should be able to prosecute appeal despite notice of appeal
    filed within Verburgt period if appellant can reasonably explain need for extension).
    Accordingly, the Court requests that appellant respond to appellee’s motion to dismiss
    within 10 days of the date this appeal is reinstated. Appellant is notified that unless you respond
    in writing, by the deadline specified, providing a reasonable explanation for untimely filing the
    notice of appeal, the appeal may be dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). You must respond
    in writing even if you have previously claimed your notice of appeal was timely filed.
    It is so ORDERED.
    Judge’s signature: /s Sarah Beth Landau
     Acting individually      Acting for the Court
    Date: October 13, 2022
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-21-00063-CV

Filed Date: 10/13/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/17/2022