the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon

Court of Appeals of Texas

the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon

DecidedJune 17, 2013

Docket01-12-00443-CV

StatusPublished

This text of the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon (the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon) 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

the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellate case name: v. Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society v. John L. Graves, et al.

Appellate case number: 01-12-00443-CV

Trial court case number: 1163921

Trial court: 334th District Court of Harris County, Texas

-and-

Appellate case name: In re Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc., Relator

Appellate case number: 01-12-01066-CV

It appears to the Court―after reviewing the motions to dismiss, the motion to show authority, the responses, and the replies―that the jurisdictional issues are intertwined with the merits in the above-referenced appeal such that the Court would be aided by full briefing. Accordingly, the Court (1) withdraws its order abating the briefing schedule, (2) orders the appellees’ brief filed within 30 days of the date of this order, and (3) carries the motions to dismiss and motion to show authority with the case. The Court will not look favorably upon motions to extend the deadline for filing the appellees’ brief.

The parties have also filed a motion to consolidate the above-referenced appeal and mandamus proceeding. That motion is denied. However, the Court will submit these two cases on the same day to the same panel. To that end, the Court requests a response to the petition for writ of mandamus. The deadline for filing a response to the petition for writ of mandamus is 30 days from the date of this order. Appellees’ may elect to combine their appellees’ brief and mandamus response in a single filing. If they do so, the Court will treat the combined briefing as having been filed in both the appeal and the mandamus proceeding. It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown Acting individually

Date: June 17, 2013

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

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellate case name: v. Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society v. John L. Graves, et al.

Appellate case number: 01-12-00443-CV

Trial court case number: 1163921

Trial court: 334th District Court of Harris County, Texas

-and-

Appellate case name: In re Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc., Relator

Appellate case number: 01-12-01066-CV

It appears to the Court―after reviewing the motions to dismiss, the motion to show authority, the responses, and the replies―that the jurisdictional issues are intertwined with the merits in the above-referenced appeal such that the Court would be aided by full briefing. Accordingly, the Court (1) withdraws its order abating the briefing schedule, (2) orders the appellees’ brief filed within 30 days of the date of this order, and (3) carries the motions to dismiss and motion to show authority with the case. The Court will not look favorably upon motions to extend the deadline for filing the appellees’ brief.

The parties have also filed a motion to consolidate the above-referenced appeal and mandamus proceeding. That motion is denied. However, the Court will submit these two cases on the same day to the same panel. To that end, the Court requests a response to the petition for writ of mandamus. The deadline for filing a response to the petition for writ of mandamus is 30 days from the date of this order. Appellees’ may elect to combine their appellees’ brief and mandamus response in a single filing. If they do so, the Court will treat the combined briefing as having been filed in both the appeal and the mandamus proceeding. It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown Acting individually

Date: June 17, 2013

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

the Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society, Inc. v. John L. Graves, Harper Trammell, Oscar Nipper, Bernard Morris, Marjorie Evans, A.J. High, and Megan Lickliter-Mundon, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-houston-aeronautical-heritage-society-inc-v-john-l-graves-harper-texapp-2013.