DocketNumber: 06-15-00014-CV
Filed Date: 4/10/2015
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 9/29/2016
ACCEPTED 06-15-00014-CV SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 4/10/2015 6:39:52 PM DEBBIE AUTREY CLERK CAUSE NO. 06-15-00014-CV __________________________________________________________________ FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, TEXARKANA DIVISION 4/10/2015 6:39:52 PM __________________________________________________________________ DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK § § v. § § JOHN M. HUBBARD § __________________________________________________________________ APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO ABATE, AND APPELLANT’S MOTION TO GIVE APPEAL PRECEDENCE __________________________________________________________________ Cory J. Floyd Texas Bar No. 24049365 cory@nortonandwood.com Cammy R. Kennedy Texas Bar No. 24079245 cammy@nortonandwood.com NORTON & WOOD, L.L.P. 315 Main Street Texarkana, Texas 75501 Phone: (903) 823-1321 FAX: (903) 823-1325 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK APPELLANT’S RESPONSE TO APPELLEE’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO ABATE, AND APPELLANT’S MOTION TO GIVE APPEAL PRECEDENCE TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: COMES NOW, Appellant WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK, who files this Response to Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Brief, or Alternatively, Motion to Abate, and Appellant’s Motion to Give Appeal Precedence, and shows unto the Court as follows: Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Brief Should Be Denied 1. Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File his brief, or in the alternative, limit any extension of time to seven (7) days. A seven (7) day extension would extend Appellee’s deadline to file his brief until April 16, 2015. 2. The Court has the authority under Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 38.6(d) to extend the time for an appellee to file a brief; however, because this appeal concerns a wrongful receivership over Appellant’s business, Pecan Point Brewing Company, as long as the receivership remains in place, Appellant suffers harm under the trial court’s order. 1 3. Appellant filed his brief on March 19, 2015, and Appellee’s brief was due on or before April 9, 2015. 4. Appellee’s reasoning for seeking this extension, “because Appellee Hubbard moved for dismissal of Appellant’s interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction of this Court...[and] that motion is pending with the Court,” presumes that this Court requires additional time to hear Appellee’s prior motion when, to Appellant’s knowledge, no additional time has been requested. As such, Appellee’s reasoning is an insufficient explanation for the delay in Appellee’s preparation and filing of his brief. 5. Texas courts have held that when a party presents an insufficient explanation for the need for additional time the party’s motion may be denied. See Hykonnen v. Baker Hughes Bus. Support Services,93 S.W.3d 562
, 564 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.); Simon v. Dillard's, Inc.,86 S.W.3d 798
, 800 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, no pet.); Chilkewitz v. Winter,25 S.W.3d 382
, 383 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.); Kidd v. Paxton,1 S.W.3d 309
, 311 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999, no pet.); Weik v. Second Baptist Church of Houston,988 S.W.2d 437
, 439 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. 2 denied); Velasquez v. Harrison,934 S.W.2d 767
, 770 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, no writ); Furr v. Furr,721 S.W.2d 565
, 567 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1986, no writ); and Dawson v. First Cont'l Real Estate Inv. Trust,590 S.W.2d 560
, 563 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1979, no writ). 6. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s request for an extension to file his brief or, in the alternative, grant only a seven (7) day extension, extending the deadline for Appellee’s brief to April 16, 2015. Appellee’s Motion to Abate Should Be Denied 7. Appellee requests that, in the alternative, this Court abate the appeal so that the trial court has an opportunity to consider Appellee’s motion to modify the judgment previously filed in the trial court proceedings. 8. Not only would allowing an abatement of this case defeat the purpose of an accelerated appeal, but Appellee also fails to cite any grounds or authority which support his bid to abate this matter until the trial court is able to issue an order correcting any prior mistakes. 3 9. Filing a postjudgment motion which seeks to reform or modify a judgment with the trial court does not extend the timetable for an accelerated appeal. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(e), see Tex. R. App. P. 28.1(b). 10. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to deny Appellee’s Motion to Abate. Appellant Moves to Give This Appeal Precedence 11. Appellant filed his Docketing Statement on February 23, 2015, reflecting that this is an accelerated appeal in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 28.1(a), and further stated that this appeal should receive precedence, preference, or priority. 12. Appellant asks this Court to give precedence to this appeal because the interests of justice require it. See Tex. R. App. P. 40.1(c). 13. Since February 3, 2015, management of Pecan Point Brewing Co. has been displaced by a wrongful receivership and injunction. Brief of Appellant, William H. Scurlock v. John M. Hubbard, No. 14C-1653-102, appeal docketed, 06-15-00014-CV (March 19, 2015). Each day that this matter remains outstanding constitutes 4 an additional infringement on Appellant, William H. Scurlock’s, right to own, operate, and manage Pecan Point Brewing Co. 14. Accordingly, Appellant asks this Court to give precedence to this appeal and require Appellee to timely file his brief in order to allow the Court to render an opinion and judgment at the earliest practicable time. PRAYER For reasons stated above, Appellant requests that this Court deny Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Brief, or in the alternative, limit any extension granted to no more than seven (7) days, deny Appellee’s Motion to Abate, and grant Appellant’s Motion to Give Appeal Precedence. 5 Respectfully submitted: /s/ Cammy Kennedy Texas Bar No. 24079245 cammy@nortonandwood.com Cory J. Floyd Texas Bar No. 24049365 cory@nortonandwood.com NORTON & WOOD, L.L.P. 315 Main Street Texarkana, Texas 75501 Phone: (903) 823-1321 FAX: (903) 823-1325 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT, WILLIAM H. SCURLOCK 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 10, 2015, a true and correct copy of Appellant’s Response to Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time to File Brief, or Alternatively, Motion to Abate, and Appellant’s Motion to Give Appeal Precedence was forwarded to the counsel below: Brent M. Langdon Kyle B. Davis LANGDON & DAVIS 625 Sam Houston Drive, Suite A New Boston, Texas 75570 Email: blangdon@ldatty.com Email: kdavis@ldatty.com /s/ Cammy Kennedy Cammy Kennedy 7
Furr v. Furr , 1986 Tex. App. LEXIS 9166 ( 1986 )
Weik v. Second Baptist Church of Houston , 988 S.W.2d 437 ( 1999 )
Kidd v. Paxton , 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 6516 ( 1999 )
Chilkewitz v. Winter , 2000 Tex. App. LEXIS 5195 ( 2000 )
Hykonnen v. Baker Hughes Business Support Services , 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 8122 ( 2002 )