TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-14-00375-CV
AusPro Enterprises, LP, Appellant
v.
Texas Department of Transportation, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 345TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-GN-11-002740, HONORABLE TIM SULAK, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
AusPro Enterprises, LP, has filed a Motion for Stay and for Supplemental Briefing
in Light of Impending Supreme Court Decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert.1 Appellant asserts that
the Supreme Court heard argument on this case in January 2015 and that its decision “could resolve
many, or even possibly all, of the issues raised in this appeal.” As the parties have already filed
briefs on the merits, AusPro requests a schedule for supplemental briefing and an adjustment of the
briefing limits. AusPro certified that the Texas Department of Transportation opposed this motion
when consulted, but the Department has not filed a response to the motion. We grant the motion in
part and deny it in part.
1
United States Supreme Court docket number 13-502.
We abate this appeal pending the announcement and release of the Supreme Court’s
opinion in Reed v. Town of Gilbert. We direct AusPro to notify this Court of the announcement and
release of that opinion by filing a letter with this Court, though appellee may so inform the Court and
the Court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion.
Upon reinstatement of the appeal, this Court will permit briefs addressing the effect
of the Reed opinion on this appeal on the following schedule: appellant’s supplemental brief will
be due thirty days after the reinstatement, appellee’s supplemental brief will be due thirty days after
the date on which appellant files its brief, and appellant’s supplemental reply brief (if any) will be
due twenty days after the date on which appellee files its post-Reed brief. Limits on the length of
individual briefs and overall briefs will remain in effect and will not be altered now. A party who
perceives the need for additional brief length may request an expansion of its limits through
established procedures. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i).
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Field
Abated
Filed: April 29, 2015
2