From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arthur v. Raborn

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Sep 28, 2021
No. 01-21-00072-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 28, 2021)

Opinion

01-21-00072-CV

09-28-2021

James P. Arthur, Mary Arthur, Legonite, Inc., Paradise Living, Inc., and Arthur Holdings, L.P. v. John M. Raborn


11th District Court of Harris County Trial court case number: 2020-13849

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

April Farris Judge

On May 4, 2021, appellants, James P. Arthur, Mary Arthur, Legonite, Inc., Paradise Living, Inc., and Arthur Holdings, L.P., were notified by the Clerk of this Court that their appeal was subject to dismissal if they failed to submit written evidence to the Court that they had paid or made arrangements to pay the fee for the preparation of the clerk's record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), 43.2(f). Appellants did not respond to the Court's May 4, 2021 notice, and on August 19, 2021, we issued an opinion dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution.

On August 24, 2021, appellants filed a motion for rehearing, stating that appellants paid the fee for the preparation of the clerk's record on June 2, 2021. However, appellants further state that they "did not notify the Court or submit written evidence of the payment," believing that such information "would be communicated to the Court by the District Clerk's Office." Appellants' motion requests that we "reinstate the case" and allow the appeal to "be resolved on its merits." See Tex. R. App. P. 49.1.

The clerk's record was subsequently filed with this Court on August 19, 2021.

Appellants' motion also notes that they conferred with appellee, John M. Raborn, regarding the relief requested in the motion, and that appellee is opposed to appellants' motion. See Tex. R. App. P. 49.12 (certificate of conference not required on motion for rehearing). On September 9, 2021, we requested appellee respond to appellants' motion for rehearing. See Tex. R. App. P. 49.2 ("A motion [for rehearing] will not be granted unless a response has been filed or requested by the court."). Appellee filed a response in opposition to appellants' motion for rehearing on September 20, 2021.

Appellants' motion for rehearing is granted.

We withdraw our opinion and judgment, issued on August 19, 2021, and reinstate this case on the Court's active docket. Appellants' brief is due to be filed within 30 days of the date of this order.

Panel consists of: Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Farris


Summaries of

Arthur v. Raborn

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Sep 28, 2021
No. 01-21-00072-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 28, 2021)
Case details for

Arthur v. Raborn

Case Details

Full title:James P. Arthur, Mary Arthur, Legonite, Inc., Paradise Living, Inc., and…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Sep 28, 2021

Citations

No. 01-21-00072-CV (Tex. App. Sep. 28, 2021)