From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Browder v. Moree

Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin
Jul 21, 2022
No. 03-19-00381-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 21, 2022)

Opinion

03-19-00381-CV

07-21-2022

Bramlette Holland Browder, Appellant v. Rachel Moree and Clarence Dean Hinds, Jr., Appellees


FROM THE 261ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-FM-17-002349, THE HONORABLE KARIN CRUMP, JUDGE PRESIDING

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly

ORDER STAYING ISSUANCE OF MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Bramlette Holland Browder appealed from the district court's final order rendered in the underlying suit affecting the parent-child relationship (SAPCR), which denied him any conservatorship or possessory rights to the child the subject of the suit. We affirmed the final order. See Browder v. Moree, No. 03-19-00381-CV, 2021 WL 2231253, at *11 (Tex. App.-Austin June 2, 2021) (mem. op.), pet. Denied, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2022 WL 2282669, at *2 (Tex. June 24, 2022) (per curiam). Browder filed a petition for discretionary review with the Supreme Court of Texas. That court denied his petition on March 11, 2022, and denied his motion for rehearing on June 24. See Browder, 2022 WL 2282669, at *2.

Browder has now filed with this Court a motion asking that we stay issuance of our mandate. See Tex. R. App. P. 18.2 (providing for stay of issuance of mandate pending United States Supreme Court disposition of petition for writ of certiorari). Appellees have not filed a response to Browder's motion. In his motion, Browder asserts that he will suffer "serious hardship" if the mandate is not stayed pending his filing of a petition for writ of certiorari and disposition thereof because the trial court's order will become a final enforceable SAPCR order that involves matters of "constitutional concern" including the denial of his right to a jury trial. He further contends that the denial of his right to a jury trial was due to "inconsistent rules throughout the state resulting in the right to a jury trial not being equally available to everyone in Texas."

We grant Browder's motion and will stay issuance of our mandate until further order. See McIntosh v. Texas State Bd. of Dental Exam'rs, No. 07-12-00196-CV, 2014 WL 4656628, at *1 (Tex. App - Amarillo Sept. 17, 2014) (order) (granting motion to stay issuance of mandate). We order Browder to file with this court a written status report on or before October 19, 2022, regarding the status of his petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. If Browder fails to file a status report by that date, we will issue our mandate without further notice.

It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Browder v. Moree

Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin
Jul 21, 2022
No. 03-19-00381-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Browder v. Moree

Case Details

Full title:Bramlette Holland Browder, Appellant v. Rachel Moree and Clarence Dean…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin

Date published: Jul 21, 2022

Citations

No. 03-19-00381-CV (Tex. App. Jul. 21, 2022)

Citing Cases

Williams v. State

As we explained previously, Rule 18.2 allows a court of appeals "to stay issuance of [its] mandate pending…

Williams v. State

Rule 18.2 allows a court of appeals "to stay issuance of [its] mandate pending the United States Supreme…