ACCEPTED
03-14-00737-CV
4439239
THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
3/10/2015 1:27:41 PM
JEFFREY D. KYLE
No. 03-14-00737-cv CLERK
_____________________________________
FILED IN
IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS3rd COURT OF APPEALS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/10/2015 1:27:41 PM
JEFFREY D. KYLE
Clerk
_____________________________________
CHASE CARMEN HUNTER, APPELLANT v. ELEANOR KITZMAN IN HER
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE, JULIA RATHGEBER
IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE, AND THE
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, APPELLEES
*REQUEST FILED DIRECTLY WITH JUSTICES
CINDY OLSON, MELISSA GOODWIND, ROBERT
PEMBERTON, DAVID PURYEAR AND JEFF ROSE*
OBJECTION TO THE CLERK’S LETTERS DATED MARCH 2, 2015, MARCH
4, 2015, FEBRUARY 13, 2015, AND JANUARY 16, 2015, IN WHICH THE
CLERK OF THIS COURT HAS ACTED AS THE COURT AND HAS ENTERED
LETTERS SIGNED ONLY BY THE CLERK WHICH STATE THAT THIS COURT
DENIED HUNTER THE REQUESTED RELIEF. BUT SAID CLERK LETTERS DO
NOT INCLUDE THE WORD “ORDER” AND DO NOT INCLUDE THE NAME OR
SIGNATURE OF ANY JUSTICE WHO MADE THE DECISION COMMUNICATED IN
THESE CLERK LETTERS. THE CLERK HAS ACTED WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO
ACT AS THE COURT TO DENY HUNTER’S REQUESTED RELIEF. THE CLERK
-1-
HAS FILED LETTERS THAT FALSELY CLAIM THAT THIS COURT RENDERED A
DECISION WHEN IT DID NOT
From Cause D-1-GN-13001957 In The 250th District Travis County,
Texas, The Honorable John K. Dietz Presiding
Chase Carmen Hunter, pro se
340 S. Lemon Ave. #9039
Walnut, CA 91789
Telephone: 707-706-3647
Facsimile: 703-997-5999
Chase_Hunter@yahoo.com
CERTIFICATION.
I, Chase Carmen Hunter, state under penalty of perjury
that the following facts and argument are true and
correct.
March 10, 2015
OBJECTION TO THE CLERK’S LETTERS DATED MARCH 2, 2015,
MARCH 4, 2015, FEBRUARY 13, 2015, AND JANUARY 16, 2015,
The Appellant, herein referred to as “Hunter”, filed
a motion for a 60-day filing extension with this court
on March 1, 2015. The clerk of this court (“Clerk”)
responded to said motion by sending Hunter a letter on
March 2, 2015, stating that said motion was denied in
part by this court. Hunter objects to her motion being
-2-
dispensed with by a letter from the Clerk (“Clerk
Letter”) and not by a court order.
Hunter filed a motion for a 60-day filing extension
with this court on March 3, 2015. The clerk of this
court (“Clerk”) responded to said motion by sending
Hunter a letter on March 4, 2015, stating that said
motion was denied by this court. Hunter objects to her
motion being dispensed with by a Clerk Letter and not
by a court order.
Hunter objects to the Clerk dispensing with Hunter’s
two aforementioned motions in violation of Texas Rule
of Appellate Procedure (“TRAP”) 10.3(a) et seq. These
two motions were not to be heard or determined “until
10 days after the motion was filed”.
Hunter objects to the Clerk’s Letters dated February
13, 2015, and January 16, 2015, because, among other
things, they state that the “Court” made a decision but
these Clerk Letters do not show a name of any justice
who made the decisions and do not include the word
“order”. They are not court orders.
-3-
This Court entered an order on January 21, 2015 (“Jan
2015 Order”). Please, take judicial notice. This Jan
2015 Order appears on its face to be a valid, genuine
court order because, among other things, it states that
it is an “order” and it names the “justices” who
participated in the court decision. However, none of
the aforementioned Clerk Letters have these two
features. Therefore, the Clerk’s letters, while they
state that this court made a decision, are not court
orders and cannot be communications of the court and
have no legal affect. These Clerk letters are only
communications of the Clerk who has apparently acted
without authority as the Court in this lawsuit.
For the aforementioned reasons, Hunter requests that
these four aforementioned Clerk’s Letters be stricken
and that any Clerk Letter that does states that it
communicates a decision by this Court but that does not
include the word “order” in the title and does not show
the name of the justice or justices who made the
decision be stricken.
TEXAS RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 10.3(b)
-4-
Hunter requests that the two aforementioned motions
be dispensed with by a court order signed by at least
one justice.
Notwithstanding the fact that the two aforementioned
letters sent by the Clerk to Hunter (“Clerk Letters”)
establish that the two aforementioned motions were not
dispensed with by the Court and were only handled by
the Clerk, Hunter requests that the two aforementioned
motions filed on March 1 and March 3, 2015, be
reconsidered in accordance with TRAP 10.3(b) in the
event that this court believes that the two associated
Clerk Letters satisfy minimum legal guidelines to be
classified as court orders.
Hunter also requests that this court provide a
written explanation establishing the facts and the
applicable law relied upon if this court classifies the
four aforementioned Clerk Letters as court orders.
WHEREFORE, the Appellant requests that the relief
requested be granted.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Chase Carmen Hunter
-5-
Chase Carmen Hunter
Appellant, pro se
340 S. Walnut Ave. #9039
Walnut, CA 91789
Tel: 707-706-3647, Fax: 703-997-5999
Email: Chase_Hunter@yahoo.com
CERTIFICATION
I, Chase Carmen Hunter, swear under penalty of perjury
that the foregoing statements are true and correct.
__________________ 3/10/2015
Chase Carmen Hunter
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Request was served upon the parties shown
below as indicated:
Cynthia A. Morales
Assistant Attorney General
By Email on March 5, 2015 at
Cynthia.Morales@texasattorneygeneral.gov
Chase Carmen Hunter
-6-