History
  • No items yet
midpage
Mary Louise Serafine v. Alexander Blunt and Ashley Blunt
03-12-00726-CV
| Tex. App. | Feb 26, 2015
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*0 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 2/26/2015 9:07:58 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk ASS TTORNEY A , AY B R THIRD COURT OF APPEALS 2/26/2015 9:07:58 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE 03-12-00726-CV AUSTIN, TEXAS *1 ACCEPTED [4306747] CLERK

email: ray@raybass.com 120 West 8 Street Tel. 512-863-8788 Georgetown, Texas 78626 Fax. 512-233-2376

FEBRUARY 26, 2013 JEFFREY D. KYLE, CLERK

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

P.O. BOX 12547

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

RE: MARY LOUISE SERAFINE

v.

ALEXANDER BLUNT & ASHLEY BLUNT NUMBER 03-12-00726-CV

LETTER SUPPLEMENT TO APPELLANT’S BRIEF This case is curently pending on appeal and Appellant wishes to bring to the Court's attention the

recent case of James v. Calkins , 446 S.W.3d 135

(Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2014), pet. filed Feb.

3, 2015.

In James v. Calkins the Houston Court of Appeals considered various claims including fraudulent lien,

where the underlying factual basis was that the

defending parties had appeared in court (as a disputed

guardian) and had filed a lis pendens. The court of

appeals found that such claims were "based on, relate

to, or are in response to, the exercise of

[appellants'] right to petition," and therefore

reversed the trial court's denial of a motion to

dismiss under the Texas Citizen Participation Act

("TCPA"). 446 S.W.3d at 150. The court thus ordered

dismissal of the claims with prejudice, and remanded

the case to the trial court for an award costs, fees,

expenses, and sanctions as required by the TCPA. Id .

The court held that the nonmovant's burden, on a motion to dismiss under the TCPA, requires "clear and

specific evidence" within the ordinary meanings of the

words, and that "[c]onclusory statements are not

probative and accordingly will not suffice to

establish a prima facie case. Id . at 150. (citation

omitted).

SINCERELY RAY BASS *3 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Rule 9.4(i)(2) the below signed counsel for appellant certifies that the foregoing

Letter Supplement To Appellant’s Brief, excluding the

parts listed in Rule 9.4(i)(1), contains 204 words.

/s/ Ray Bass _____________________ Ray Bass CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Appellant’s Brief has been served via the method indicated

below, to the person(s) noted below on this, the 12 day of

February, 2013.

Doran D. Peters

HAJJAR, SUTHERLAND, PETERS & WASHMON, LLP

1205 Rio Grande Street

Austin, Texas 78701

Attorney For Appellees

Via Email DPeters@hspwlegal.com

Ronald Max Raydon

Law Office of Ronald Max Raydon

1718 Fry Road, Suite 450

Houston, Texas 77084

Attorney For Scott Lockhart, and

Attorney For Austin Drainage & Foundation, LLC

Via Email ron@raydonlaw.com

RAY BASS

Case Details

Case Name: Mary Louise Serafine v. Alexander Blunt and Ashley Blunt
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Feb 26, 2015
Docket Number: 03-12-00726-CV
Court Abbreviation: Tex. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.