Mike E. Deubler v. the Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee Under Novastar Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 15, 2015
Docket07-13-00221-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Mike E. Deubler v. the Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee Under Novastar Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc. (Mike E. Deubler v. the Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee Under Novastar Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mike E. Deubler v. the Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee Under Novastar Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., (Tex. 2015).

Opinion

ACCEPTED 07-13-00221-CV SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS 7/15/2015 10:37:42 PM Vivian Long, Clerk

No. 07-13-221-CV

FILED IN Mike E. Deubler § 7th Court In the COURT of OFAppeals APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS Appellant, § 7/15/2015 10:37:42 PM § VIVIAN LONG v. § CLERK § The Bank of New York Mellon as § Successor Trustee Under Novastar § Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and § Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., § Appellees § Seventh District of Texas

Appellant’s Motion to Extend Time to File Motion for Rehearing

To the Honorable Court:

Appellant, Mike E. Deubler, requests that the Court extend time for filing of

his Motion for Rehearing as to the opinion herein of June 15, 2015 (“Opinion”) under

Rules of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b), 49.1, 49.8 and all other applicable Rules, and

in support of this motion show:

1. Regular Time for Motion for Rehearing. A Motion for Rehearing would

have been regularly due by June 30, 2015. This Motion for Extension of Time is timely,

since the thirtieth day after June 15, 2015 is today, July 15, 2015.

2. Necessary Extension of Time. Appellant asks that the Court grant him

an extension for filing of Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing from June 30, 2015 until

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING today, July 15, 2015, the last day by rule for seeking reconsideration, in order that it

may be deemed timely made. Much of counsel’s available time in the weeks following

June 15, 2015 was occupied with preparation of filings to seek to prevent foreclosures

for the July 6, 2015 sale date, replies to extensive discovery and dispositive motions

and various other deadline filings. From approximately a month before the issuance

of the opinion through a week after issuance, Appellant’s counsel was without his

computer on five different occasions for multiple days, due to numerous software problems

that rendered the computer almost completely non-functional; repairs required multiple

attempts by two different sets of experts to resolve. In the month since the Opinion,

counsel was also required to attend the out-of-town funeral of a family member, expend

days not normally required working on bonding of an appeal, complete briefing in another

court of appeals, while also attending to arranging medical care and treatment and

consulting with physicians in the care of his elderly mother, for whose care counsel

is solely responsible. Appellant has sought no previous extension of time regarding

the filing of a Motion for Rehearing.

3. Prayer. For these reasons, your Appellant requests that the Court:

(A) grant an extension of the time to file Appellant’s Motion for

Rehearing until July 15, 2015; and

(B) grant Appellant such other and further relief to which he may be

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 2 entitled or is in the interest of justice.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Michael Brinkley _____________________________________ Michael Brinkley State Bar No. 03004300 BRINKLEY LAW PLLC P. O. Box 820711 Fort Worth, Texas 76182-0711 (817) 284-3535; fax (888) 511-0946 michael@brinkleypllc.com Attorney for Appellant

Certificate Regarding Conference

The undersigned appellant’s counsel conferred by telephone and email today, July 15, 2015, with counsel for appellee, Elizabeth Duffy, and was advised that Appellee is opposed to the relief requested.

/s/ Michael Brinkley __________________________________ Michael Brinkley Attorney for Appellant

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 3 Certificate of Service. I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served on the following counsel and/or pro se parties of record, in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5, on the date shown:

Robert T. Mowrey Elizabeth K. Duffy Matthew H. Davis LOCKE LORD LLP 2200 Ross St., Suite 2000 Dallas, Texas 75201 (214) 740-8000, fax (214) 740-8800 Attorneys for Appellee.

Dated: July 15, 2015.

/s/ Michael Brinkley _____________________________________ Michael Brinkley

APPELLANT’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 4

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mike E. Deubler v. the Bank of New York Mellon as Successor Trustee Under Novastar Mortgage Funding Trust 2005-1, and Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mike-e-deubler-v-the-bank-of-new-york-mellon-as-successor-trustee-under-texcrimapp-2015.