Marcus Brent Patterson, Individually, as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Diane Patterson, and as Next Friend of Daniel Patterson and Danae Patterson, and Danae Patterson and Daniel Patterson (Now 18 Years of Age) v. Brewer Leasing, Inc.

Summarize
Check Treatment

Related Cases

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER Appellate case name: Marcus Brent Patterson, Individually, as independent administrator of the Estate of Diane Patterson, and as next friend of Daniel Patterson and Danae Patterson; Danae Patterson; and Daniel Patterson v. Brewer Leasing, Inc. Appellate case number: 01-14-00013-CV Trial court case number: 2011-64488 Trial court: 334th District Court of Harris County Appellants have filed an “Agreed Motion to Supplement Clerk’s Record,” requesting that “the Court . . . supplement the Clerk’s Record with the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and the Agreed Partial Judgment signed on or about July 2, 2012.” If appellants believe that a relevant document has been omitted from the clerk’s record, they “may by letter direct the trial court clerk to prepare, certify, and file in the appellate court a supplement containing the omitted item.” TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(c)(1). Any such supplemental clerk’s record filed by the trial court clerk will be part of the appellate record. TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(b)(4), (c)(3). Accordingly, we dismiss appellants’ motion to supplement the clerk’s record as moot. Appellants have also filed an “Agreed Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellants’ Brief.” In their motion, appellants contend that they are requesting an extension “in order for the Clerk’s Record to be supplemented” and because counsel will “be out of state May 2-11 [sic].” The documents with which the appellants seek to supplement the record are not a required part of the record absent designation by a party. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(a)(1)–(12). Therefore, because no party designated these filings to be included in the record before the trial court clerk filed the record, the clerk’s record was complete when it was filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(a)(13), (b)(1), 35.1. And, although appellant is entitled to request additional documents be included in a supplemental clerk’s record, appellant’s untimely request does not render the clerk’s record incomplete or provide grounds for seeking extensions of time to file their brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), 34.5(a)(13), (b)(1), (4), (c)(1), 38.6(a)(1), (d). Nevertheless, we grant appellants’ motion for extension of time and order appellants to file their brief no later than June 6, 2014. It is so ORDERED. Judge’s signature: /s/ Chief Justice Sherry Radack Acting individually  Acting for the Court Date: May 6, 2014