Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company

Order filed April 22, 2016. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________ NO. 14-14-00865-CV ____________ CORESLAB STRUCTURES (TEXAS), INC., Appellant V. SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 55th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010-55665A ORDER On April 19, 2016, this court issued an order in which we stated that the following relevant items were missing from the clerk’s record in this appeal: (1) An Attorney’s Fees Affidavit, which is Exhibit G (Filed Under Seal pursuant to Protective Order) to the Affidavit of C. Scott Kinzel, which is Exhibit N to Coreslab’s First Amended Motion for Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on April 11, 2014. (2) Plavnicky Kinzel & Makowski LLP Invoices, which are Exhibit H (Filed Under Seal) to the Affidavit of C. Scott Kinzel, which is Exhibit N to Coreslab’s First Amended Motion for Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on April 11, 2014. (3) An Attorney’s Fees Affidavit, which is Exhibit G (Filed Under Seal pursuant to Protective Order) to the Amended Affidavit of C. Scott Kinzel, which is Exhibit N to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (4) Plavnicky Kinzel & Makowski LLP Invoices, which are Exhibit H (Filed Under Seal) to the Amended Affidavit of C. Scott Kinzel, which is Exhibit N to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (5) Exhibit P to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (6) Exhibit Q to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (7) Exhibit R to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (8) Exhibit S to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. (9) Exhibit T to Coreslab Structures (Texas), Inc.’s Response to Scottsdale’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion For Summary Judgment on Damages, filed in the trial court on September 8, 2014. This court directed the Harris County District Clerk to file each of the items listed above, if the item is contained in the trial court’s case file, in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals. This court also directed that, if one or more of the items listed above 2 are not part of the trial court’s case file, the district clerk should file in a supplemental clerk’s record a certified statement that the omitted item or items are not a part of the trial court’s case file. In response to this court’s order, the Harris County District Clerk filed a fourth supplemental clerk’s record in this appeal. The fourth supplemental clerk’s record does not contain any of the nine items listed in this court’s order, nor does the fourth supplemental clerk’s record contain a certified statement that any of these nine items is not a part of the trial court’s case file. The fourth supplemental clerk’s record contains a certificate in which Harris County District Clerk certifies that “the above and foregoing are true and correct copies of all the proceedings directed by Counsel and/or Rule 34 to be included in the 4th Supplemental Clerks Record . . . . ” The table of contents in the fourth supplemental clerk’s record lists six of the nine items (items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9). After each of these six items listed in the table of contents there is an uncertified statement that “(THE ITEM MENTIONED ABOVE IS NOT PART OF THE TRIAL COURT’S CASE FILE).” The fourth supplemental clerk’s record contains no statement regarding item 1, item 2, or item 4. A post-submission letter brief on file in this case contains a copy of a “Joint Motion to Transfer Sealed Documents to the Court of Appeals” that apparently was filed in the trial court in July 2015. In this motion, appellant’s counsel and appellee’s counsel jointly state that two of these items (item 3 and item 4 listed above) were filed under seal in the trial court on September 8, 2014. The Harris County District Clerk is directed to search all locations in which items filed under seal in the trial court are maintained to determine whether item 1, item 2, item 3, or item 4 listed above is located there. The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file each of the nine items listed in this order, if the item is contained in the trial court’s case file (whether under seal or otherwise), in the 3 Fourteenth Court of Appeals on or before April 29, 2016. The items, if any, that were filed under seal in the trial court should be filed under seal with the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in a supplemental clerk’s record under seal. The items, if any, that were not filed under seal in the trial court should be filed with the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in a supplemental clerk’s record that is not under seal. If one or more of the omitted items are not part of the trial court’s case file, the district clerk is directed to file in a supplemental clerk’s record that is not under seal a certified statement that the omitted item or items are not a part of the trial court’s case file. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby. 4