Silk v. Terrill

899 S.W.2d 235, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3295, 1994 WL 805196
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 9, 1994
Docket05-94-00006-CV
StatusPublished

This text of 899 S.W.2d 235 (Silk v. Terrill) 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.

Bluebook
Silk v. Terrill, 899 S.W.2d 235, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3295, 1994 WL 805196 (Tex. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

OPINION

BARBER, Justice.

Holly Silk sued Robert C. Terrill, M.D. for medical malpractice. The trial court granted Terrill’s motion for summary judgment. Silk appeals asserting that she presented sufficient evidence to raise genuine issues of material fact on Terrill’s grounds for summary judgment. We do not reach the merits of Silk’s appeal because she failed to bring forward a sufficient record on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

SUFFICIENCY OF RECORD ON APPEAL

“The burden is on the appellant, or the other party seeking review, to see that a sufficient record is presented to show error requiring reversal.” TexR.App.P. 50(d). In an appeal from a summary judgment, an appellant must bring forward all of the evidence presented to the trial court. DeSantis v. Wackenhut Corp., 793 S.W.2d 670, 689 (Tex.1990) (op. on reh’g), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1048, 111 S.Ct. 755, 112 L.Ed.2d 775 (1991). This Court must presume that omitted summary judgment evidence supported the trial court’s judgment. Id., Cantu v. Western Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 723 S.W.2d 668, 668 (Tex.1987) (per curiam); Perry v. Kroger Stores, Store No. 119, 741 S.W.2d 533, 535 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1987, no writ) (op. on reh’g).

Terrill moved for summary judgment on the grounds that his conduct was consistent with the standard of care and that his actions or inactions did not proximately cause Silk’s injury. Terrill supported his motion for summary judgment with an affidavit. Silk filed a detailed affidavit discussing and *236 controverting the assertions in Terrill’s supporting affidavit.

The appellate record does not contain Ter-rill’s supporting affidavit. 1 This omission was pointed out in Terrill’s appellate brief. Additionally, Silk’s appellate counsel was questioned during oral argument before this Court about the omission of Terrill’s supporting affidavit from the record.

In a supplemental brief filed with this Court, Silk argues that Terrill’s supporting affidavit is not necessary because the parties focused on the sufficiency of the controverting affidavit at both the trial level and on appeal. This argument is without merit. In a summary judgment appeal, the Court reviews the trial court’s judgment, the summary judgment pleadings, and the evidence presented to the trial court. That the parties’ emphasis may have been on other matters is of no consequence.

Silk failed to bring forward a sufficient record on appeal. This Court must presume the omitted evidence supported the trial court’s judgment. See DeSantis, 793 S.W.2d at 689. We overrule Silk’s point of error.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

1

. Silk attached a copy of Terrill's supporting affidavit to her appellate brief. "The attachment of documents as exhibits or appendices to briefs is not formal inclusion in the record on appeal and thus, the documents cannot be considered.” Perry, 741 S.W.2d at 534.

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

Related

Perry v. Kroger Stores, Store No. 119
741 S.W.2d 533 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)
DeSantis v. Wackenhut Corp.
793 S.W.2d 670 (Texas Supreme Court, 1990)
Cantu v. Western Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.
723 S.W.2d 668 (Texas Supreme Court, 1987)
Pocono Green, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors
498 U.S. 1048 (Supreme Court, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
899 S.W.2d 235, 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 3295, 1994 WL 805196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/silk-v-terrill-texapp-1994.