The El Paso Court of Appeals recently dismissed an appeal because the appellant failed to comply with a trial court’s post-judgment orders. Here, a final judgment was entered against the appellant and the appellant did not pay the judgment or file a supersedeas bond. The appellee sought post-judgment discovery. The appellant failed to answer the
dismissal
Oral Hearing Required on a Motion to Reinstate
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
In Resurgence Financial, L.L.C. v. Foster, the Dallas Court of Appeals followed and applied the Texas Supreme Court‘s opinion in Thordson v. City of Houston. From the moment that Resurgence filed its suit the trial court notified Resurgence that the case would be placed on the dismissal docket unless an answer were…
Appellate Dismissals in Dallas
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
Ever wonder what it takes to get an Appellant’s appeal dismissed? The Dallas Court of Appeals has given us the answer in at least two circumstances, one involving defective briefing and one involving a failure to make arrangements to pay for an appellate record.
In Bridwell v. McMillin, the Court granted what appears to be a 60-day extension of time to file an Appellant’s Brief. Later, the Court granted a second extension of time to file the Appellant’s Brief–this time for 30 days. The Appellant filed his Appellant’s Brief 9 days early, but it contained a number of briefing deficiencies. The Court ordered the Appellant to correct the briefing deficiencies within 10 days or his appeal would be dismissed. By letter, the Appellant requested that the Court treat his defective brief as his amended brief–in effect refusing to correct the deficiencies. In response, the Appellee moved to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance with the Court’s order. The Court granted the motion to dismiss. The Court’s Memorandum Opinion in Bridwell can be found at this link.Continue Reading Appellate Dismissals in Dallas
Abatement vs Dismissal: Split of Authority?
By Byron Henry on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
In an interesting opinion regarding dominant/servient jurisdiction and abatement, the Houston (First) Court of Appeals made this observation regarding the proper relief on a motion to abate:
Generally, the proper relief on a motion to abate on the ground of dominant jurisdiction is abatement. . . . However, there is also authority that that if a party
…
Society of Engineers Lacks Standing to Sue State Architecture Board
By Byron Henry on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
In a longstanding dispute over which agency has the authority to regulate engineers, the Austin Court of Appeals recently held that the Texas Society of Professional Engineers (Society) lacked standing to bring suit against the Texas Board of Architectural Examiners (Board) on behalf of its members because it failed to meet the test for associational standing. …
“With Prejudice” Means What It Says
By Byron Henry on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
A divided panel of the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that a dismissal with prejudice operates as an adjudication on the merits for purposes of res judicata even if the trial court erred by including the phrase "with prejudice" in the dismissal order. The majority followed Amarillo precedent while the dissent called for it to be overruled. Because the Amarillo…