Newsletters

by JoAnn Storey, JoAnn Storey, P.C. Discovery is not unduly burdensome “[w]here a responding party’s own conscious, discretionary decision, such as how it chooses to store and organize its materials, causes discovery to be burdensome.” In re K & L Auto Crushers,...

by Nicholas Bruno The relative infrequency of en banc decisions in the courts of appeals leaves relatively few opinions governing various issues related to en banc procedures. This is especially true because not all of the intermediate appellate courts in Texas are...

The record provides the raw material of an appeal; it is the closed universe in which appellate practitioners work. The Texas courts of appeal, after all, do not consider matters outside the record on appeal.[1] That’s old hat. The record is important, critically so. And, so, we are all well-acquainted with the appellate record’s preparation. The clerk and reporter—by rule and request—assemble the papers and transcripts, combine them, file them, number them, and so on.[2] Their contents turn on rule and the parties’ designations.[3] You know all that. But what about supplementing the record, say, with relevant but missing materials, after an appeal has progressed from its early administrative stages and into the merits? Can a party do that in Texas appellate courts?

by JoAnn Storey, JoAnn Storey, P.C. A person need not be a party to the underlying litigation in order to seek mandamus relief. Terrazas v. Ramirez, 829 S.W.2d 712, 723 (Tex.1991) (orig. proceeding). Rather, relators must have a justiciable interest in the underlying...

by Ryan Philip Pitts, an associate in the appellate practice group of Haynes Boone, LLP’s Houston office. Texas law authorizes a trial court to permit—and a court of appeals to accept—an interlocutory appeal from an otherwise unappealable order if the order “involves...