Sandra Maribel Arroyo v. Cristo Rey Garza
13-15-00211-CV
Tex. App.Sep 29, 2015Background
- Arroyo vs Garza in Thirteenth Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi-Edinburg, restricted appeal from grant of summary judgment (Dec. 22, 2014).
- Plaintiff Garza moved for summary judgment seeking recognition of a purchase money resulting/constructive trust on two properties; order granted (CR 91-92).
- Arroyo, pro se initially, listed address 15200 N. Moorefield Road, Mission; later discovery responses list P.O. Box 3662, Edinburg.
- Arroyo did not participate in the hearing or file post-judgment motions; no standard notice of appeal filed.
- Notice under Rule 306a(3) was not promptly sent: 42 days elapsed between judgment and clerk’s notice; notice lacking proper address information (CR 93-94).
- Arroyo timely filed a restricted appeal; argued improper service/notice and Rule 306a(3) noncompliance; appellate relief requested.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the summary judgment should be reversed for improper service/notice. | Arroyo was not properly served; attorney did not withdraw; service occurred at the wrong address. | Garza followed proper service and notice procedures; Arroyo had opportunity to respond. | Reversed and remanded. |
| Whether the clerk violated Rule 306a(3) by delaying notice of judgment. | Notice was not immediate; 42-day delay violated the rule. | Clerk complied; notice eventually mailed. | Reversed and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ins. Co. of State of Pa. v. Lejeune, 297 S.W.3d 354 (Tex. 2009) (restricted appeal standards; face-of-record concept)
- Clopton v. Park, 66 S.W.3d 513 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2001) (jurisdictional requirements for restricted appeals)
- Norman Communications v. Tex. Eastman Co., 955 S.W.2d 269 (Tex. 1997) (restricted appeal limitations; post-judgment relief)
- Autozone, Inc. v. Duenes, 108 S.W.3d 917 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2003) (restricted appeal framework; face-of-record concept)
- General Electric Co. v. Falcon Ridge Apartments, Joint Venture, 811 S.W.2d 942 (Tex. 1991) (face-of-record standard; review scope)
- Ginn v. Forrester, 282 S.W.3d 430 (Tex. 2009) (Rule 306a(3) notice timing considerations)
- In re Lynd Co., 195 S.W.3d 686 (Tex. 2006) (notice requirements; appellate timing)