Zia Ul-Haq Sheikh v. Jane Doe ( 2020 )

Order entered March 2, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-01329-CV ZIA UL-HAQ SHEIKH, Appellant V. JANE DOE, Appellee On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-08987 ORDER Before the Court is appellant’s February 18, 2020 motion opposing sealing of records. The motion appears to be in response to appellee’s February 12, 2020 motion to seal portions of appellant’s brief. That motion was denied as moot on February 18, 2020, prior to the filing of appellant’s motion but after we struck appellant’s brief for exceeding the word limit under the appellate rules. Because appellee’s motion was moot, appellant’s motion is also moot and DENIED. We note our February 18th order also struck the clerk’s record, which consisted of one sealed volume and one unsealed volume. Although the sealed volume included a copy of the trial court’s orders permanently sealing certain court records in accordance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 76a, many of the documents in the sealed volume were not subject to the sealing orders and certain documents in the unsealed volume should have been in the sealed volume. On February 26, 2020, Ms. Pitre filed a corrected record, consisting again of one sealed volume and one unsealed volume. The sealed volume consists of twenty-eight documents, excluding the cover, index, caption, cost bill, and clerk’s certificate. Of those twenty-eight documents, three are the trial court’s sealing orders and two are documents ordered to be permanently sealed–(1) defendant’s findings of law and response to plaintiff’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and (2) the final judgment. The remaining documents are not subject to the sealing orders. Of the documents in the unsealed volume, three are to be sealed–(1) defendant’s motion to determine admissibility of plaintiff’s prior sexual history, (2) defendant’s motion to request denial of plaintiff’s protective order, and (3) defendant’s response to plaintiff’s reply in support of her motion for protection. Because the clerk’s record does not comply with the sealing orders, we STRIKE the record and ORDER Ms. Pitre to file a second corrected record no later than March 12, 2020. Appellant’s brief shall be filed within thirty days of the filing of the corrected record. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Pitre and the parties. /s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE