Santander Consumer USA, Inc. v. Mario A. Mata Centroplex Automobile Recovery, Inc. Blake Thornton Vandusen, John F. Thompson D/B/A Centroplex Automobile Recovery, Inc. And Redshift Investigation, Inc.

Summarize
Check Treatment

Related Cases

ACCEPTED 03-14-00782-CV 6882539 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/11/2015 10:50:29 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK No. 03-14-00782-CV FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS In The Court Of Appeals AUSTIN, TEXAS For The Third Court Of Appeals 9/11/2015 10:50:29 AM Austin, Texas JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Appellant, v. MARIO A. MATA, CENTROPLEX AUTOMOBILE RECOVERY, INC., JOHN F. THOMPSON d/b/a CENTROPLEX AUTOMOBILE RECOVERY, INC., REDSHIFT INVESTIGATION INC., and BLAKE THORNTON VANDUSEN, Appellees. ON APPEAL FROM THE 353RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-13-000677 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND AND SUPPLEMENT BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE MARIO A. MATA E. JASON BILLICK, SBN: 24078230 WILLIAM B. GAMMON, SBN: 07611280 GAMMON LAW OFFICE, PLLC 1201 Spyglass Drive, Ste. 100 Austin, Texas 78746 Phone: (512) 472-8909 Fax: (888) 545-4279 firm@gammonlawoffice.com TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THIS COURT: E. Jason Billick and William B. Gammon of the GAMMON LAW OFFICE, attorneys of record for Appellee Mario A. Mata, file this Motion for Leave to Amend and Supplement Brief of Plaintiff-Appellee Mario A. Mata pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.7. Appellee Mario A. Mata respectfully asks this Court leave to amend and supplement his brief on or before Tuesday, September 15, 2015, at 5:00 PM. In support, Appellee states as follows: RELEVANT FACTS 1. On February 17, 2015, Appellee Mario A. Mata filed his Brief of Plaintiff- Appellee, Pro Se. 2. On March 9, 2015, Appellant Santander Consumer USA, Inc. filed its Reply Brief of Appellant to Brief of Appellee, Mario A. Mata. To date, there have been no other brief submissions. 3. On April 10, 2015, the Gammon Law Office, PLLC, filed its appearance in this Court on behalf of Appellee Mario A. Mata. 4. On August 26, 2015, this Court set this matter for oral argument on September 23, 2015 at 1:30 PM. ARGUMENT 5. This Court has held that "[a] brief may be amended or supplemented whenever justice requires, on whatever reasonable terms the court may 1 prescribe." Majeed v. Hussain, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 8477, *26 (Tex. App. Austin Oct. 22, 2010) (citing TEX. R. APP. P. 38.7). Generally, "a party must seek leave of court to file an amended or supplemental brief, and the appellate court has some discretion in deciding whether to allow the filing." Standard Fruit & Vegetable Co. v. Johnson, 985 S.W.2d 62, 65 (Tex. 1998). 6. Here, Appellee Mario A. Mata’s counsel did not file an appearance until after Maria A. Mata filed his brief pro se. Counsel has conducted an in- depth evaluation of the appeal in anticipation of the September 23, 2015, oral argument. Counsel has determined Mario A. Mata’s brief must be amended and supplemented so that it may accurately "acquaint the court with the issues in [this] case and…present [an] argument that will enable the court to decide the case.” TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9. 7. Specifically, counsel for Appellee Mario A. Mata would like to raise an argument with regard to the issue of whether there is a valid agreement to arbitrate. Here, Plaintiff-Appellee has brought suit against Appellant, in relevant part, for breach-of-contract. The Court of Appeals of Texas for the Eighth District has held: Because arbitration is a creature of contract, we apply standard contract principles to determine the enforceability of arbitration agreements. See Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg., 388 U.S. 395, 404 n.12, 87 S. Ct. 1801, 1806 n.12, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1270 2 (1967); Ysleta Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Godinez, 998 S.W.2d 700, 702 (Tex. App.--El Paso 1999, no pet.). "A fundamental principle of contract law is that when one party to a contract commits a material breach of that contract, the other party is discharged or excused from any obligation to perform." Hernandez v. Gulf Group Lloyds, 875 S.W.2d 691, 692, 37 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 731 (Tex. 1994). Thus, because material breach is a ground for revoking a contract, it should be a ground for revoking an arbitration agreement. Tri-Star Petroleum Co. v. Tipperary Corp., 107 S.W.3d 607, 612-613 (Tex. App. El Paso 2003, pet. denied) (emphasis added). 8. Appellant has brought this appeal with unclean hands. It attempts to rely upon an agreement it breached several years ago. Therefore, Appellee Mario A. Mata should, at the very least, be afforded the opportunity to amend and supplement his brief to adequately present this argument. 9. Appellant is correct that the question of whether an enforceable agreement to arbitrate exists is a legal question that the appellate court reviews de novo. Rachal v. Reitz, 403 S.W.3d 840, 843 (Tex. 2013). Therefore, there are some legal arguments Appellee Mario A. Mata may raise for the first time on this appeal. 10. Appellee Mario A. Mata respectfully asks this Court leave to amend and supplement its brief. Counsel for Appellee Mario A. Mata believes a supplemental and amended brief can be filed no later than Tuesday, September 15, 2015, at 5:00 PM. 3 Respectfully submitted, /s/ E. Jason Billick E. JASON BILLICK, SBN: 24078230 WILLIAM B. GAMMON, SBN: 07611280 GAMMON LAW OFFICE, PLLC 1201 Spyglass Drive, Ste. 100 Austin, Texas 78746 Phone: (512) 472-8909 Fax: (888) 545-4279 firm@gammonlawoffice.com Counsel for Appellee Mario A. Mata 4 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 10.1(a)(5), I hereby certify that our office has conferred, or made a reasonable attempt to confer, with all other parties which are listed below about the merits of this motion on the 10th day of September, 2015. David L. Treat, SBN: 20205300 LINDOW STEPHENS TREAT, LLP ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE RED SHIFT Method of contact: Email and telephone Results: Attorney for Appellee advised that they oppose this motion. Karen C. Burgess, SBN: 00796276 RICHARDSON + BURGESS, LLP ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES CENTROPLEX AUTOMOBILE RECOVERY, INC. AND JOHN F. THOMPSON Method of contact: Email and telephone Results: Attorney for Appellee advised that they oppose this motion. John S. Kenefick, SBN: 24006294 MACDONALD DEVIN, P.C ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE BLAKE THORNTON VANDUSEN Method of contact: Email and telephone Results: Attorney for Appellee advised that they do not oppose this motion. Vicki W. Hart, SBN: 24046037 DEVIN, NAYLOR & TURBYFILL, PLLC ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC. Method of contact: Telephone Results: Attorney for Appellant advised that they oppose this motion. /s/ E. Jason Billick E. Jason Billick 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument has been served by Pro-Doc e-service or facsimile on this the 11th day of September 2015: Christopher A. Lotz Karen C. Burgess David L. Treat RICHARDSON + BURGESS, LLP LINDOW STEPHENS TREAT, LLP 221 West 6th Street, Suite 900 The Vogue Building Austin, Texas 78701 600 Navarro Street, Sixth Floor Tel: (512) 482-8808 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Fax: (512) 499-8886 Tel: (210) 227-2200 kburgess@richardsonburgess.com Fax: (210) 227-4602 Attorney for Appellees Centroplex clotz@1stlaw.com Automobile Recovery, Inc. and dlt@1stlaw.com John F. Thompson Attorneys for Appellee Red Shift Investigation, Inc. John S. Kenefick Donald L. Turbyfill John R. Sigety Deborah C. S. Riherd MACDONALD DEVIN, P.C. Vicki W. Hart 3800 Renaissance Tower DEVIN, NAYLOR & TURBYFILL, 1201 Elm Street PLLC Dallas, Texas 75270 4801 Woodway, Suite 420-West Tel: (214) 744-3300 Houston, Texas 77056 Fax: (214) 747-0942 Tel: (713) 622-8338 jkeneifick@macdonalddevin.com Fax: (713) 586-7053 jsigety@macdonalddevin.com dturbyfil@dntlaw.com Attorneys for Appellee driherd@dntlaw.com Blake Thornton Vandusen vhart@dntlaw.com Attorneys for Appellant Santander Consumer USA, Inc. /s/ E. Jason Billick E. Jason Billick 6