Herbert Rolnick v. Sight's My Line, Inc., a Florida Corporation Stewart Lantz Riggs, Aleshire & Ray Blazier, Christensen, Bigelow & Vir, P.C. And Adams & Graham

Opinion

ACCEPTED 03-15-00335-CV 6830551 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/8/2015 3:33:41 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK

No. 03-15-00335-CV FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/8/2015 3:33:41 PM IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS JEFFREY D. KYLE AUSTIN, TEXAS Clerk

HERBERT ROLNICK, Appellant

V.

SIGHT’S MY LINE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION; STEWART LANTZ; RIGGS, ALESHIRE & RAY; BLAZIER, CHRISTENSEN, BIGELOW & VIRR; AND ADAMS & GRAHAM, Appellees

Interlocutory Appeal from the 200th Judicial District Court in Travis County, Texas, The Honorable Tim Sulak, Presiding

UNOPPOSED SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(d), Appellant

Herbert Rolnick respectfully files this unopposed motion asking the

Court to extend the deadline to file his Appellant’s Reply Brief three (3)

days from September 8, 2015 to September 11, 2015. This is the second

unopposed motion for extension of time Appellant has filed with respect

to his Reply Brief.

1 1. The trial court signed the order overruling Appellant’s special

appearance on May 14, 2015. Appellant filed his Notice of Appeal on June

3, 2015. The court reporter filed the reporter’s record on June 10, 2015.

The district clerk filed the clerk’s record in this Court on June 12, 2015.

Appellant Rolnick filed his Appellant’s Brief on July 9, 2015.

2. Appellee Riggs, Aleshire & Ray, P.C. filed its Brief of Appellee

on July 29, 2015. Appellee Adams & Graham, L.L.P. filed its Brief of

Appellee on August 5, 2015. Appellees Sight’s My Line, Inc. and Stewart

Lantz filed their Brief of Appellees on August 5, 2015. Appellee Blazier,

Christensen, Bigelow & Virr never filed a brief and apparently did not

file a response to this Court’s August 5, 2015 letter.

3. The Appellees’ Briefs filed by August 5, 2015, taken together

are sufficiently similar that Appellant Rolnick has been preparing a

single Reply Brief addressing all of them.

4. Although extensive work has been done on the Reply Brief, a

persistent technological problem has interfered with the undersigned’s

ability to finish the brief. For the past ten to fourteen days, the

undersigned’s firm has been experiencing intermittent loss of internet

access. During that time, the firm has had its own IT provider as well as

an internet specialist working on the problem. That work has been done

during all times of the day and night, as well as during the weekend. At

the end of last week, the problem appeared to be resolved.

2 5. Over the Labor Day holiday, the undersigned had

intermittent problems connecting remotely and attorneys working in the

office started experiencing intermittent internet outages. When the

undersigned returned to her office Tuesday morning, internet access was

intermittent and sometimes lasted only a few minutes. Although the

undersigned has regained internet access, the individuals working on the

problem have not been able to assure her that the problem has been fixed.

6. The loss of time over the weekend and particularly today

caused by the frequent interruptions of internet access has prevented

completion of the brief by September 8, 2015. The uncertainty over

whether the problem has been fixed justifies the request for an additional

three (3) days in which to complete the brief. Appellant therefore requests

the Court to extend the current deadline for the Appellant’s Reply Brief

from September 8, 2015 to September 11, 2015.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

On August 20, 2015, the undersigned contacted counsel for each

appellee that filed a brief to confer on this motion. Each of them informed

the undersigned that there was no opposition to the extension requested

in this motion.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant Herbert

Rolnick respectfully prays for the Court to grant his Unopposed Second

3 Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Reply Brief. Appellant

also prays for such other relief to which he may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

RUTH G. MALINAS Texas Bar No. 08399350 TIM T. GRIESENBECK, JR. Texas Bar No. 08454450 SCOTT M. NOEL Texas Bar No. 00797158 Plunkett & Griesenbeck, Inc. Catholic Life Building, Suite 900 1635 N.E. Loop 410 San Antonio, Texas 78209 (210) 734-7092 (telephone) (210) 734-0379 (facsimile) rmalinas@pg-law.com

/s/ Ruth G. Malinas RUTH G. MALINAS

COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT HERBERT ROLNICK

4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This will certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Unopposed Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Reply Brief has been served electronically through the Texas electronic filing manager this 8th day of September, 2015, on the following attorneys of record:

J. Hampton Skelton Brandon Duane Gleason Skelton & Woody 248 Addie Roy Road, Suite B-302 Austin, TX 78746 hskelton@skeltonwoody.com bgleason@skeltonwoody.com Attorneys for Sight’s My Line, Inc., a Florida Corporation and Stewart Lantz

Craig S. Hilliard Stark & Stark P.O. Box 5315 Princeton, NJ 08543-2315 chilliard@stark-stark.com Attorney for Sight’s My Line, Inc., a Florida Corporation and Stewart Lantz

Scott R. Kidd Scott V. Kidd Kidd Law Firm 819 W. 11th Street Austin, TX 78701 scott@kiddlawaustin.com svk@kiddlawaustin.com Attorneys for Riggs, Aleshire & Ray

Michael B. Johnson Salvador Davila Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, LLP 701 Brazos, Suite 1500 Austin, TX 78701 mjohnson@thompsoncoe.com sdavila@thompsoncoe.com Attorneys for Blazier, Christensen,

5 Bigelow & Virr

Robert E. Valdez Joseph Cuellar Valdez, Jackson & Trevino, PC 1826 North Loop 1604 West, Suite 275 San Antonio, TX 78248 revaldez@vjtlawfirm.com jcuellar@vjtlawfirm.com Attorneys for Adams & Graham

/s/ Ruth G. Malinas RUTH G. MALINAS