History
  • No items yet
midpage
Tan Duc USA v. Jimmy Tran
01-14-00539-CV
| Tex. App. | Sep 24, 2015
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*0 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 9/24/2015 4:50:55 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk *1 ACCEPTED 01-14-00539-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 9/24/2015 4:50:55 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK NO. 01-14-00539-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON, TEXAS HOANG-YEN THI DANG, and

TAN DUC CONSTRUCTION LIMITED COMPANY,

Appellants

v.

JIMMY TRAN,

Appellee and Conditional Cross-Appellant TRAN’S MOTION TO EXTEND and BIFURCATE HIS DEADLINES

FOR FILING BRIEFS AS APPELLEE and as CONDITIONAL CROSS-APPELLANT TO THE HONORABLE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS:

Tran (Appellee, and Conditional Cross-Appellant) was assigned the

deadline of September 24 to file his Brief (as Appellee and Conditional Cross-

Appellant as to Appellant and Conditional Cross-Appellee Dang) by a prior order

of this Court. (That Tran would file a single brief as to Dang, both as Appellee

and as Conditional Cross-Appellant, and the lack of objection to the conditionality

of Tran’s cross-appeal as to Dang, were subsumed by an agreed motion made and

accepted earlier in this appeal.)(The conditionality of Tran’s Cross-Appeal is that

Tran does not wish to seek appellate relief as to Dang, his judgment debtor, unless

this Court grants relief to Dang. In common speech, Tran will choose his bird in

the hand, if it stays there.)

This motion comes to pass because none of the Jury Questions and Jury

Instructions Tran submitted and the Trial Court rejected are in the Clerk’s Record

on Appeal or Clerk’s Supplemental Record on Appeal, nor are they in the “JIMS”

electronic case file available online to Tran through the District Clerk’s website,

nor (Tran started asking some weeks ago) has the Chief Clerk of the trial court yet

been able to locate the paper originals of those proposed-but-rejected Jury

Questions and Instructions. The trial court clerk reports to Tran that she is looking

for the paper originals, and the court staff have reported to Tran they lately have

requested the actual paper file to be “pulled” from the Clerk’s storage facility in

order that they may search for the missing Tran’s proposed-but-rejected Jury

Questions and Instructions. Tran has assiduously pursued the trail of these

necessary documents since the omission became manifest. Tran is unable to

prepare and file his brief as a Conditional Cross-Appellant without reference to the

Jury Questions and Jury Instructions he submitted that the Trial Court refused. It

is unknown to Tran when the Chief Clerk of the Trial Court will conclude her

inquiry and report either that the papers are utterly missing or that they have been

located and scanned into the clerk’s electronic record and available for

supplementation to the appellate record in this Court.

However, though his present deadline is for filing a single Brief as Appellee

and as Conditional Cross-Appellant, Tran does not require the missing proposed-

but-rejected jury questions and instructions in order to prepare the portion of his

brief as an Appellee responsive to the Appellant Dang’s brief, and so Tran

proposes that despite the earlier agreed motion to file a single brief (as Appellee

and Conditional Cross-Appellant) as to Dang that Tran now, to accommodate the

uncertain time needed to complete the trial court clerk’s continuing search for the

missing papers, bifurcate his briefing as to Dang into one brief to be filed as

Appellee as to Dang, and a later brief to be filed as Conditional Cross-Appellant as

to Dang.

Tran does not request adjustment of the briefing deadline as to Tan Duc,

which deadline was set by this Court’s prior order.

Tran moves for the following relief:

A. Permission to bifurcate his briefing as to Dang into an Appellee’s

Brief responding to Appellant Dang’s brief, and a Conditional Cross- Appellant’s Brief as to Dang.

B. An extension of Three (3) Weeks from the present deadline to file his

Appellee’s Brief as to Dang’s Appellant’s Brief.

C. An extension of One (1) Month from the present deadline to file his

Conditional Cross-Appellant’s Brief as to Dang, understanding that the trial court clerk’s office’s retrieval of its own paper files and search for the missing proposed-but-rejected jury questions and instructions are outside Tran’s control, though his requests are direct and assiduous and continuing.

Respectfully submitted, /S/ Matt Muller Matthew S. Muller Texas Bar No. 14648450 1445 North Loop West, Suite 760 Houston, Texas 77008 Tel. (713)227-1888 Fax. (713)227-1881 Attorney for Tran Certificate of Conference By earlier agreement with Dang’s current appellant counsel, ordinary and

reasonable requests for deadline relief are not opposed. This motion does not

affect Tan Duc and its counsel has not been contacted.

/S/ Matthew Muller *5 Certificate of Service I will cause the e-filing system to serve a true copy of this instrument on all

counsel this 24 th day of September, 2015.

/S/ Matthew Muller C:\Users\Matt\Dropbox\TRAN Appellate\motion bifurcate.wpd

Case Details

Case Name: Tan Duc USA v. Jimmy Tran
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Sep 24, 2015
Docket Number: 01-14-00539-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.