Case Information
*0 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 12/21/2015 6:06:30 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk *1 ACCEPTED 04-15-00478-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 12/21/2015 6:06:30 PM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK No. 04-15-00478-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOURTH DISTRICT SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS MOHICAN OIL & GAS, LLC, and MOG PRODUCING, LP, Appellants/Defendants, VS.
CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY, Appellee/Plaintiff. On Appeal from the 49th Judicial District Court Webb County, Texas Judge Joe Lopez APPELLEE’S RESPONSE TO APPELLANTS’ SECOND MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE APPELLANTS’ BRIEF
December 21, 2015 G RAY R EED & M G RAW , P.C .
Darin L. Brooks Texas Bar No. 00796252 dbrooks@grayreed.com John G. George, Jr. Texas Bar No. 24051944 jgeorge@grayreed.com Meagan W. Glover State Bar No. 24076769 mglover@grayreed.com 1300 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77056-3000 *2 Telephone: (713) 986-7228 Facsimile: (713) 986-7100 A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLEE /P LAINTIFF ONOCO P HILLIPS C OMPANY
Appellee ConocoPhillips Company (ConocoPhillips) files this response to the
Second Motion of Appellants Mohican Oil & Gas, LLC, and MOG Producing, LP,
(Appellants) to Extend Time to File Appellants’ Brief.
1. The Appellants’ original deadline to file their brief was November 23,
2015. On November 18, the Appellants filed a motion to extend time to file their
brief, claiming an additional 30 days was needed because of proceedings in the
underlying trial court, “work on other cases,” and the birth of the lead counsel’s
child. The Court granted the Appellants’ motion, making the current deadline to file
the Appellants’ brief December 23.
2. On December 18, the Appellants contacted ConocoPhillips and asked
if it would agree to an additional 16-day extension, claiming additional time is
needed because of a hearing held on December 1 in the underlying trial court and
the illness of the father of John Newman, the Appellants’ representative.
ConocoPhillips responded that it opposed an additional 16-day extension.
3. As explained by ConocoPhillips in its response to the Appellants’ first
motion to extend time to file their brief, ConocoPhillips normally does not oppose
reasonable extensions of time. However, the Appellants’ repeated requests for
extensions on the eve of deadlines with often implausible excuses established a clear
pattern of excuse and delay during the proceedings in the trial court—and now in the
appellate court.
4. As with the Appellants’ first motion to extend time to file their brief,
although ConocoPhillips is sympathetic to some of the Appellants’ reasons in its
second motion to extend time, the implausible excuses outweigh the seemingly
legitimate ones (the illness of John Newman’s father), leading ConocoPhillips to
believe that the Appellants’ second motion is yet another delay tactic.
5. Because the Court has already granted a 30-day extension, and given
the Appellants’ established pattern of excuse and delay, ConocoPhillips respectfully
requests the Court deny the Appellants’ second motion to extend time to file their
brief. In the event that this Court is inclined to grant Appellants’ second motion to
extend time to file their brief, then ConocoPhillips respectfully requests that the
Court order that no further extensions will be allowed for Appellants to file their
brief.
Respectfully submitted, G RAY , R EED & M G RAW , P.C. By: /s/ Darin L. Brooks Darin L. Brooks *4 Texas Bar No. 00796252 dbrooks@grayreed.com John G. George, Jr. Texas Bar No. 24051944 jgeorge@grayreed.com Meagan W. Glover State Bar No. 24076769 mglover@grayreed.com 1300 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77056-3000 Telephone: (713) 986-7228 Facsimile: (713) 986-7100 A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLEE /P LAINTIFF ONOCO P HILLIPS C OMPANY *5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 21, 2015, a true and correct copy of the
forgoing instrument was served on all counsel-of-record via facsimile and the
Court’s electronic filing service.
/s/ Darin L. Brooks Darin L. Brooks