History
  • No items yet
midpage
Wayne Novy, by and Through His Legal Guardian Forrest Novy v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission And Chris Traylor, in His Official Capacity as Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission
03-15-00201-CV
Tex. App.
Nov 13, 2015
Check Treatment
Case Information

*0 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/13/2015 1:37:38 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk No. 03-15-00201-CV THIRD COURT OF APPEALS 11/13/2015 1:37:38 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE AUSTIN, TEXAS 03-15-00201-CV *1 ACCEPTED [7821593] CLERK _______________________________________ I N THE T HIRD C OURT OF A PPEALS AT A USTIN , T _______________________________________ W AYNE N OVY , by and through his legal guardian Forrest Novy, Appellant , vs.

T EXAS H EALTH AND H UMAN S ERVICES C OMMISSION and C HRIS T RAYLOR in

his official capacity as Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and

Human Services Commission, Appellees . _______________________________________ N PPEAL FROM C OUNTY C OURT AT L AW N O . 1, RAVIS C OUNTY ______________________________________ JOINT STATUS REPORT AND MOTION TO EXTEND ABATEMENT

All of the parties to this appeal—Appellant Wayne Novy (“Mr. Novy”),

by and through his legal guardian Forrest Novy, and Appellees Texas Health

and Human Services Commission (“THHSC”) and Chris Traylor, Execu-

tive Commissioner of THHSC [*] —provide this joint status report to the

Court and move the Court to extend the abatement of the appeal ordered in

the Memorandum Opinion of August 21, 2015 (“abatement order”).

*2 I. J OINT STATUS REPORT

1. The Court’s abatement order abated the appeal and tolled all filing

deadlines, but directed that, without further order, the abatement would end

on December 18, 2015. It also instructed the parties to submit by that date

either a status report or a motion to dismiss. The parties jointly submit this

status report, along with a joint motion to extend the period of abatement.

See Part II, below.

2. The substantive issue in this legal dispute is whether the 2014 trans-

fer decision concerning the appellant, Mr. Novy, is legally valid. The basis

for the original joint motion to abate was that the 2014 transfer decision was

being re-evaluated. At the time the previous joint motion was filed, it was an-

ticipated that the re-evaluation would be completed in ninety days.

3. This re-evaluation period has since been extended another ninety

days or so. On or about November 5, 2015, notice was provided that the pe-

riod of re-evaluation was being extended and should be completed by some-

time in February 2016. This new extension means that whether the substan-

tive legal dispute is going to remain a live controversy remains an open ques-

tion, one which will not be answered until sometime shortly before March 1,

2016.

II. J OINT MOTION TO EXTEND ABATEMENT PERIOD

4. In light of the matters set forth in the foregoing status report, the par-

ties to this appeal agree that it would serve the interests of justice and pro-

mote judicial economy for the Court to continue in effect the abatement of

all further proceedings in this appeal in order to allow time for the re-

evaluation to be completed and for those affected by the re-evaluation to be

notified of, and have at least a short time to consider, the result of that re-

evaluation. The parties suggest that the abatement be extended until at least

March 18, 2016.

5. It is further urged by the parties that the order extending the abate-

ment include a provision that the briefing schedule be such that the appel-

lant’s opening brief (if one remains necessary at the end of the abatement pe-

riod) be due no earlier than fifteen days from the end of the abatement peri-

od. This approach would avoid potential confusion and uncertainty about

whether the opening brief would otherwise be due on the very same day that

the abatement period ends.

Wherefore, based on the foregoing matters, the parties to this appeal

jointly urge the Court to grant this Joint Motion, extend the abatement peri-

od until March 18, 2016, and direct that any opening brief by the appellant be

due fifteen days from the end of the abatement period.

Respectfully submitted, __ /s/ Renea Hicks ______ Renea Hicks State Bar No. 09580400 L AW O FFICE OF M AX R ENEA H ICKS 101 West 6 th Street, Suite 504 Austin, Texas 78701-2934 (512) 480-8231 (512) 480-9105 fax rhicks@renea-hicks.com ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT __ /s/ Eugene A. Clayborn ______ EUGENE A. CLAYBORN State Bar No.: 00785767 Assistant Attorney General Deputy Chief, Administrative Law Divi- sion FFICE OF THE TTORNEY G ENERAL OF

P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2548 Telephone: (512) 475-3204 Facsimile: (512) 320-0167 eugene.clayborn@texasattorneygeneral.gov ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES *5 C ERTIFICATE OF S ERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this Joint Status Report

and Motion to Extend Abatement has been served through the electronic fil-

ing system on the following counsel of record for the appellees on November

13, 2015:

Eugene A. Clayborn, Assistant Attorney General

Deputy Chief, Administrative Law Division FFICE OF THE TTORNEY G ENERAL OF

P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

eugene.clayborn@texasattorneygeneral.gov.

_ /s/ Renea Hicks ___________ Renea Hicks

[*] Under Tex. R. App. Proc. 7.2(a), Chris Traylor, the current THHSC Executive Com- missioner should be substituted as a party for Kyle Janek, the former THHSC Executive Commissioner.

Case Details

Case Name: Wayne Novy, by and Through His Legal Guardian Forrest Novy v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission And Chris Traylor, in His Official Capacity as Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Nov 13, 2015
Docket Number: 03-15-00201-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.