Tracy Nixon v. the Attorney General of the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Supreme Court
• Decided: March 27, 2018
• Docket: 05-17-01080-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

sr fl119 tUp 27 4910: 28 Maz, CLE(

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT DALLAS

NO.s 05—17—O1O8O—cv

TRACY NIXON

APPELLANT APPELLANTS MOTION TO PROCEED

VS s

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND KIMEERLfN RHYNES, APPELLEES

APPELLANT TRACY NIXON MAKES THE REQUEST FOR THE COURT OF APPEALS TO

PROCEED WITH THE APPELLATE BRIEFS FILED ON 03/08/2018 APPELLANT IS

PRO SE AND DO NOT HAVE THE FUNDS TO REFILE THE APPELLATE BRIEF REQUESTE D

TO BE CORRECTED AS REQUESTED BY THE COURT OF APPEALS CLERKS OFFICE 03/22/2018 THE APPELLANT WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO PREPARE THE BRIEF

AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE TIME FROM WORK.: AND ADDITIONAL RESOURCES MOREOVER THE NECESSARY MATTERS AND ISSUES ON APPEAL ARE STIPULATED AND THEREBY DESIGNATED AND PROVIDED TO THE COURT APpFLLANT PRAYS THE COURT OVERSEE TECHNICAL. IN ADDITION TO BEING BROUGHT BACK IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROCEDUR AL TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE APPELLANT WOULD NEED A

SUPERSEDEAS BOND AS REQUESTED, APPELLANT ASKS THAT THIS COURT INCOURAGE THE APPELLEES TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF

AND REINSTATE THE COURT OF APPEALS STATUTORY REQUIREMENT TO

REPLY TO THE APPELLATES BRIEF AS CUSTOMARY.

IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS THIS IS A FAMILY LAW CASE FILED BY THE APPELLEES THAT

WAS FILED IN MAY OF 2015 AND CONTESTED BY THE APPELLANT THE CASE WAS NOT

A COMPLEX CASE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO COURT AND COMPLETED WITHIN

SIX MONTHS AND WITHIN 180 DAYS OF THE DATE THE NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS FILED

ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION RULE 6.

APPELLANT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE UNFAIRLY PREJUDICED BY ANY FURTHER DELAY WITHOUT

SUPERSEADAS BOND TO SUSPEND THE JUDGMENT. WHILE THIS APPEAL IS PENDING AND OR

IF APPELLANT IS BEING REQUESTED TO CORRECT THE APPEAL ‘.BRIEF.

RESP ULLY SUBMITTED

TRACY NIXON PRO SE 4415 SOUTH MALCOLM X BLVD DALLAS TEXAS 75215 214—916—9009 tsmith9OO9gmai1 .com