Steven Paul Wilson v. Charles C. Dorbandt

February 23, 2015 CAUSE NO. 00553- 03-14-0053-CV Steven Paul Wilson, § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS Appellant, § v. | THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS o c Charles C. Dorbandt, | Appellee. § AUSTIN DIVISION § APPELLANT'S REPLY BRIEF AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT COMES NOW, Appellant, Steven Paul Wilson, in reply to Appellee's Memorandum in Answer to Appellant's Brief. As not to be overly redundant Appellant will keep his reply to a bare minimum. For the following reasons Appellee's memorandum is not persuasive: 1) Appellee's brief was due January 9, 2015 and Appellee as put forth no reason for his brief being 31 days late. Thus, no reasonable cause exists for Appellee's tardiness and this appeal should be decided on Appellant's Brief alone. Notwith standing: 2) Appellee continues with his general denials. Appellee's "No Evidence" Summary Judgement Motion failed to specifically state the elements for which there is no evidence, and therefore the summary judgement cannot stand; 3) Statute of Limitations: a. Appellant in his cause of action specifically pled fraud- ulant concealment up to and including August 26, 2013 well within the 2 year statute of limitation for mal practice. Appellee failed to negate the allegation and conclusively establish the bar. Statute of limitations does not bar this action; ^RECEIVEdN FEB 2 3 2015 1. THIRD COURT OF APPEA" S \ JEFFREYD.ir.1F V b. Appellant in his cause of action specifically plead that the defamation, and slander/libel arose from Appellee's perjured .testimony at the evidentiary hearing held on August 26, 2013 and thus well within the 1 year statute of limitations for this type of cause of action. Whether Appellee purjured himself is a fact question to be decided by the jury. Statute of limitations does not bar this cause of actioni 4) Appellee can take no comfort in district court's adverse- ruling on Appellant's 11.07 in that: a. Appellee was not a party to that action; b. The habeas is ongoing, Wilson v. Stephens, Case No. A- 14-CA-382'.-3-LY, United States District Court for Western District of Texas. And; c. The state court's judgement hinged on Appellee's pur jured testimony. 5) Appellant was not afforded "adequate time" for discovery And; a. The district court failed to rule on any of Appellant's pending discovery motions; b. Non-parties,State's Attorney Martin Placke and Lee County Sheriff Rodney E. Myers,failed to comply to subpoenas seeking specific discovery in their respective possession that establishes actual instances of perjury by Appellee at the evidentiary hearing of August 26, 2013. And; c. That these and other discovery issues are currently before this Honorable Court, In re Steven Paul Wilson, No. . (Writ of Mandamus addressing discovery issues). 2. 6) Appellant was not given actual notice to the summary judgement hearing. An unsigned, by the district court, notice produced by Appellee does not suffice. 7) That the district court failed to give Appellant an opportunity to amend his pleadings if the court found the same to be deficient. IN CONSLUSION Appellant gives this HOnorable Court numerous ground in which the Court can vacate the improperly entered no evidence summary judgement, and Appellant would respectfully request that the Court address each and every one so as to preclude readdressing the same issues at a latter date. The summary judgement should be vacated and the case remanded with instructions. WHEREFORE, Appellant would pray that the relief requested herein be GRANTED. Respectfully suomit submitted, Steven Wilson 1638937 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I. Appellant, Steven Paul Wilson do hereby certify that I have this day, the / '(^^ day of February, 2015 mailed a copy of the foregoing Reply Brief and Memorandum to the following: Charles C. Dorbandt Attorney at Law 7000 N. Mopac Expwy Suite 200 Austin, TX 78731 Steven Wilson 1638937 Polunksy Unit 3872 FM 350 South Livingston, TX 77351 3. February 17, 2015 Dear Clerk, Earlier last month I filed a writ of mandamus in relation to this case, In re Steven Paul Wilson, No. . I do not no the case number. When I mailed in I requested a file-stamped copy, but heard nothing back. Being incarcerated, and having opnly access to a typewriter, this would be my only way to have an orignial copy and the case no. If possible, I'd still like to have a copy of the mandamus I filed. For your convenience I've enclosed a SASE. If not possible, please at send me the case number so I'll now that the Writ was received. Thanks. Sincerely, Steve1 Wilson 1638937 Polunsky Unit 3872 FM 350 South Livingston, TX 77351 PS: Also, a filed-stamped copy of the enclosed. Thanks, again /RECEIVED^ FEB 2 3 2015 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS / y JEFFREY C KV^.X Steve Wilson 1638937 NORTH HOUSTON TX : polunsky Unit 3872 FM 350 South Livingston, TX 77351 *9 i~E:S eSCvlS Pfcl "9 i Clerk of the Court Court of Appeals Third District PO Box 12547 Austin,-TX 78711-2547 i|ll}«|i».mi,}t|l>).)f^|i)iii,}|},I|,,,infl>||>|>,.||||,