Dernick Resources, Inc. v. David Wilstein and Leonard Wilstein, Individually and as Trustee of the Leonard and Joyce Wilstein Revocable Trust

ACCEPTED 01-13-00853-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 10/6/2015 4:55:59 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK No. 01-13-00853-CV FILED IN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS 10/6/2015 4:55:59 PM HOUSTON, TEXAS CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk DERNICK RESOURCES, INC. v. DAVID WILSTEIN AND LEONARD WILSTEIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE LEONARD AND JOYCE WILSTEIN REVOCABLE TRUST On Appeal From the 164th Judicial District Court Of Harris County, Texas; Cause No. 2002-31310 Emergency Motion to Increase Amount of Deposit in Lieu of Supersedeas Bond Britton D. Monts Tom C. McCall Kendall M. Gray Texas Bar No. 14303900 Texas Bar No. 13350300 Texas Bar No. 00790782 bmonts@themontsfirm.com tmccall@themccallfirm.com kendallgray@andrewskurth.com THE MONTS FIRM David B. McCall Georgia L. Lucier 401 Congress Ave. Texas Bar No. 13344500 Texas Bar No. 24043523 Suite 1540 dmccall@themccallfirm.com georgialucier@andrewskurth.com Austin, Texas 78701-3851 THE McCALL FIRM Kathryn Boatman Telephone: (512) 474-6092 3660 Stoneridge Road Texas Bar No. 24062624 Facsimile: (512) 692-2981 Suite F-102 kathrynboatman@andrewskurth.com Austin, Texas 78746 ANDREWS KURTH LLP Telephone: (512) 477-4242 600 Travis Street, Suite 4200 Facsimile: (512) 477-2271 Houston, Texas 77002-2929 Telephone: (713) 220-3981 Facsimile: (713) 238-7183 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES AND CROSS-APPELLANTS DAVID WILSTEIN AND LEONARD WILSTEIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE LEONARD AND JOYCE WILSTEIN REVOCABLE TRUST HOU:3596655.2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction And Summary .............................................................1 II. Arguments And Authorities .............................................................2 III. Conclusion And Prayer .....................................................................5 -i- HOU:3596655.2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES Fairways Offshore Exploration, Inc. v. Patterson Services, Inc., 355 S.W.3d 296 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.) .......................................................................................................4 In re Nalle Plastics Family Ltd. P’ship, 406 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. 2013)......................................................................4 Jackson Walker, LLP v. Kinsel, No. 07-13-00130-CV, 2014 WL 720889 (Tex. App.— Amarillo Feb. 14, 2014, no pet.) .............................................................5 Whitmire v. Greenridge Place Apartments, 333 S.W.3d 255 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. dism’d) ...............................................................................................3 STATUTES Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 52.006 ........................................................3 OTHER AUTHORITIES Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(b) ..................................................................................1 Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(d) ..................................................................................1 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.2(a)(1) ..................................... 1, 3 -ii- HOU:3596655.2 I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY This Court must review the amount of a deposit in lieu of supersedeas bond “based both on conditions as they existed at the time the trial court signed an order, and on changes in those conditions afterward.” Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(b). Earlier this year, this Court increased the trial court’s judgment to a new total of $4,429,376.71. Conditions changed. More security is needed. The Wilsteins asked Dernick to increase its deposit, but it refused, claiming (erroneously) this Court’s June 30, 2015 judgment is tentative and ineffective and therefore need not be fully superseded to stay execution until the mandate issues. The Wilsteins then filed a motion asking the trial court to require Dernick to increase its deposit, but the court refused, adopting Dernick’s facially erroneous “mandate” argument.1 The Wilsteins now ask this Court to apply the law correctly and require Dernick to increase its deposit to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.2(a)(1). The Wilsteins’ motion “must be heard at the earliest practicable time” because, in the meantime, the Wilsteins are left unprotected. Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(d). 1 See Exhibit A, a transcript of the September 25, 2015 hearing, at 13. HOU:3596655.2 II. ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES The trial court’s original judgment awarded a total of $3,238,260.90.2 To suspend enforcement during its appeal, Dernick filed a cash deposit of $583,427.08 in lieu of supersedeas bond, which Dernick determined was the sum of compensatory damages, prejudgment interest on those damages, two years of post-judgment interest on the entire judgment, and costs awarded in the judgment.3 Dernick eventually agreed to deposit another $1 million for a total of $1,583,427.98, and execution of the original judgment was stayed. Since then, however, this Court significantly increased the trial court’s judgment. On June 30, 2015, the Court modified the trial court’s judgment to award the Wilsteins an additional $750,000 of compensatory damages, originally awarded by the jury but set aside by the trial court, and interest on those compensatory damages.4 The total amount of the judgment is now $4,429,376.71.5 That means 2 See 3CR3523–28, attached hereto as Exhibit B. 3 3CR3704–08, attached hereto as Exhibit C. 4 2CR3166–78, attached hereto as Exhibit D, at 3177. See Exhibit E, a true and correct copy of this Court’s judgment; see also 5 Exhibit B. -2- HOU:3596655.2 Dernick’s deposit in lieu of supersedeas bond is no longer sufficient, and the Wilsteins are left unprotected.6 By rule, the total amount that must be superseded is now $2,032,412.67, including the sum of compensatory damages, prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest for the estimated duration of the appeal, and costs:  $583,427.14, the superseded amount in the original judgment,7  $750,000, the Bradshaw compensatory damage award,8  $365,924.26, prejudgment interest on the Bradshaw award, as reflected in the Court’s judgment,9  $111,592.43, two years of post-judgment on the Bradshaw award, and  $221,468.84, one year of post-judgment interest on the entire judgment. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.2(a)(1); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 52.006. See Whitmire v. Greenridge Place Apartments, 333 S.W.3d 255, 262 (Tex. 6 App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. dism’d) (noting that a bond “secure[s] the appellee and abate[s] the remedies he would otherwise have for realizing his judgment”). 7 Exhibit C. 8 Exhibit E. 9 Exhibit E. -3- HOU:3596655.2 The trial court abused its discretion in suspending execution of the Wilsteins’ judgment without a sufficient deposit. There is no doubt that the $750,000 Bradshaw damage award is compensatory and must be superseded. In re Nalle Plastics Family Ltd. P’ship, 406 S.W.3d 168, 171–72 (Tex. 2013). But the court did not even include that. Additionally, omission of adequate interest is an abuse of discretion. Fairways Offshore Exploration, Inc. v. Patterson Services, Inc., 355 S.W.3d 296, 304 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (“We conclude that a supersedeas bond that does not include in its sum the amount of prejudgment interest is ‘patently ineffective’ to secure a money judgment awarding such interest.”). Dernick’s original deposit included only two years of estimated post-judgment interest. But the original judgment was signed on July 9, 2013, more than two years ago, and Dernick has indicated that it will file a petition for review with the Texas Supreme Court later this year. Assuming the petition is denied after it is filed—the quickest possible resolution—that process will likely take another four to six months at least, extending the appellate process another year beyond the two years of post-judgment interest currently posted by Dernick. As such, additional post-judgment interest must be added: one additional year on the amount originally superseded, and three years on the new $750,000 Bradshaw award, which is effective as of the -4- HOU:3596655.2 date of the original judgment (July 9, 2013). Jackson Walker, LLP v. Kinsel, No. 07-13-00130-CV, 2014 WL 720889, at *1 (Tex. App.— Amarillo Feb. 14, 2014, no pet.) (holding that setting the amount of a supersedeas bond that does not include adequate post-judgment interest is an abuse of discretion). The current deposit is only $1,583,427.08. Therefore, the deposit is deficient by $448,985.59,10 and the Wilsteins are left unprotected. III. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER The Wilsteins request that the Court grant this Emergency Motion and require Dernick to increase the deposit in lieu of supersedeas by $448,985.59. Should Dernick fail to comply, the Wilsteins request permission to execute on the amended judgment. This is the result of subtracting Dernick’s current deposit, $1,583,427.08, 10 from the amount that must be superseded, $2,032,412.67. -5- HOU:3596655.2 Respectfully submitted, By:/s/Kendall M. Gray Kendall M. Gray Texas Bar No. 00790782 kendallgray@andrewskurth.com Georgia L. Lucier Texas Bar No. 24043523 georgialucier@andrewskurth.com Kathryn Boatman Texas Bar No. 24062624 kathrynboatman@andrewskurth.com ANDREWS KURTH LLP 600 Travis Street, Suite 4200 Houston, Texas 77002-2929 Telephone: (713) 220-3981 Facsimile: (713) 238-7183 Britton D. Monts Texas Bar No. 14303900 bmonts@themontsfirm.com THE MONTS FIRM 401 Congress Ave., Suite 1540 Austin, Texas 78701-3851 Telephone: (512) 474-6092 Facsimile: (512) 692-2981 -6- HOU:3596655.2 Tom C. McCall Texas Bar No. 13350300 tmccall@themccallfirm.com David B. McCall Texas Bar No. 13344500 dmccall@themccallfirm.com THE McCALL FIRM 3660 Stoneridge Road, Suite F-102 Austin, Texas 78746 Telephone: (512) 477-4242 Facsimile: (512) 477-2271 Attorneys for Appellees and Cross-Appellants David Wilstein and Leonard Wilstein, Individually and as Trustee of the Leonard and Joyce Wilstein Revocable Trust CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE The undersigned conferred with counsel for Appellant and Cross-Appellee Dernick Resources, Inc. on October 6, 2015. Counsel for Dernick Resources, Inc. does not agree to the relief requested in this Motion. /s/Kendall M. Gray Kendall M. Gray -7- HOU:3596655.2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 6, 2015, true and correct copies of the above and foregoing instrument have been e-served on the following counsel for Dernick Resources, Inc.: Alan B. Daughtry alan@alandaughtrylaw.com 675 Shartle Circle Houston, Texas 77024 Kathrine M. Silver ksilver@jw.com Richard A. Howell rahowell@jw.com Jackson Walker L.L.P. 1401 McKinney, Suite 1900 Houston, Texas 77010 D. Patrick Long plong@pattonboggs.com Patton Boggs LLP 2000 McKinney Ave., Suite 1700 Dallas, TX 75201 /s/Kendall M. Gray Kendall M. Gray -8- HOU:3596655.2