Michele O. Miller and Robert H. Steelhammer v. Green Bank, N.A.
This text of Michele O. Miller and Robert H. Steelhammer v. Green Bank, N.A. (Michele O. Miller and Robert H. Steelhammer v. Green Bank, N.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
ORDER
Appellate case name: Michele O. Miller and Robert H. Steelhammer v. Green Bank, N.A.
Appellate case number: 01-18-00070-CV
Trial court case number: 2016-25547A
Trial court: 281st District Court of Harris County
On January 21, 2019, appellant Michele O. Miller filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. She represented that “[a]ll other parties have agreed to this dismissal,” and she included a certificate of conference with the same representation.
Our review of the record in this case indicates that appellant Robert H. Steelhammer filed for bankruptcy on January 31, 2018 in the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division (Case No. 18-30385).* Therefore, this appeal is stayed by the operation of the automatic stay in bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. § 362(a).
The automatic stay in bankruptcy “deprives state courts of jurisdiction over the debtor and his property until the stay is lifted or modified.” Houston Pipeline Co. LP v. Bank of Am., N.A., 213 S.W.3d 418, 428 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (quoting Baytown State Bank v. Nimmons, 904 S.W.2d 902, 905 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ denied)). “An action taken in violation of the automatic stay is void, not merely voidable.” Cont’l Casing Corp. v. Samedan Oil Corp., 751 S.W.2d 499, 501 (Tex. 1988). At this time, the Court is without jurisdiction to rule on the unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. See id.
Until the parties notify the Court that the bankruptcy has been concluded or the bankruptcy trustee has lifted the stay for the purposes of this appeal and move to reinstate the case, the Court will take no further action other than to receive and hold any documents tendered during the period of suspension. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. * See Docketing Statement (Feb. 15, 2018), Miller’s Third Unopposed Motion to Extend Briefing Deadline (June 11, 2018), Miller’s brief (July 11, 2018), Green Bank’s Unopposed Motion to Extend Briefing Deadline (Aug. 3, 2018), Green Bank’s Second Unopposed Motion to Extend Briefing Deadline (Sept. 6, 2018), and Green Bank’s brief (Nov. 9, 2018). Unless a party successfully moves to reinstate or sever, this appeal will be an inactive case on the Court’s docket. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.3.
It is so ORDERED.
Judge’s signature: ____/s/ Peter Kelly___ Acting individually Acting for the Court
Date: __February 5, 2019__
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Michele O. Miller and Robert H. Steelhammer v. Green Bank, N.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michele-o-miller-and-robert-h-steelhammer-v-green-bank-na-texapp-2019.